Skip to main content

Full text of "The constitutional history of England since the accession of George the third, 1760-1860 : with an new supplementary chapter, 1861-71"

See other formats 


HICHAEOi^ 


TSBT^tHVXKaP 


.^m^^^ 


Jgitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/constitutionalhi03maytuoft 


LORD    MACAU  LAY'S    WORKS. 


Essays,  England,  Lays,  and  Miscellanies: — 

COMPLETE  WOEKS  of  LOED  MACAULAY. 

Edited  by  his  Sister,  Lady  Teevelyan.      Library    Edition,  with 
Portrait.     8  vols,  8vo.  £o.  os.  cloth  ;  or  £8.  85.  bound  in  calf. 

HISTOEY  of  ENGLAND,  from  the  ACCESSION 

of  JAMES  the  SECOND:— 

Student's  Edition,  2  vols,  crown  8vo.  price  12s. 
People's  Edition,  4  vols,  crown  8vo.  I65. 
Cabinet  Edition,  8  vols,  post  8vo.  485. 
Library  Edition,  5  vols.  8vo.  £4. 

CRITICAL  and  HISTOEICAL  ESSAYS:— 

Student's  Edition,  1  vol.  crown  8vo.  6s. 
People's  Edition,  2  vols,  crown  8vo.  8s. 
Cabinet  Edition,  4  vols,  post  8vo.  245. 
Library  Edition,  3  vols.  8vo.  36s. 
Cheap  Edition,  1  vol.  crown  8vo.  3s.  6d. 

SIXTEEN  ESSAYS,  reprinted  separately 


Addison  and  Walpole,  \s. 
Frederick  the  Great,  1*. 
Croker's  Boswell's  Johnson,  1*. 
HaUam's    Constitutional    history, 

16mo.  Is.   Fcp.  8vo.  &d. 
Warren  Hastings,  \s. 


Pitt  and  Chatham,  Is. 
Eanke  and  Gladstone,  1.";. 
Milton  and  Machiavelli,  6rf. 
Lord  Bacon,  Is.         Lord  Olive,  1  s. 
Lord  Byron  and  the  Comic  Dra- 
matists of  the  Eestoration ,  Is. 


LAYS  of  Al^CIENT  EOME  :— 

Illustrated  Edition,  fcp.  4to.  21s. 

With  Ivry  and  The  Armada,  16mo.  3s.  Qd. 

Miniature  Illustrated  Edition,  imperial  16mo.  10s.  Qd. 

MISCELLANEOUS  WEITINGS:— 

Library  Edition,  2  vols.  8vo.  21s. 

People's  Edition,  One  Voltjme,  crown  8vo.  45.  Qd. 

SPEECHES,  corrected  by  Himself:— 

People's  Edition,  crown  8vo.  3s.  6d. 
Speeches  on  Parliamentary  Eeform,  16mo.  Is. 

MISCELLANEOUS  WEITLSTGS  &  SPEECHES 

Student's  Edition,  in  One  Volume,  crown  8vo.  price  6s. 


London,  LONGMANS  &  CO. 


CHEAP    EDITIONS 

OF 

STANDARD    WORKS. 


The    Rev.     SYDNEY    SMITH'S     ESSAYS, 

2«.  6d.  sewed ;  3s.  6d.  cloth. 

The  Rev.  SYDNEY  SMITH'S  MEMOIR  and 
LETTERS, 

25.  6d.  sewed ;  35.  6d.  cloth. 

LORD  MACAULAY'S  ESSAYS  :— 

Cheapest  Authobised  Edition,  3s.  6d.  sewed ;  4s.  6d.  cloth. 
Student's  Edition,  price  6s.  cloth. 
People's  Edition,  2  vols,  price  8s.  cloth. 

LORD    MACAULAY'S    HISTORY    of 
ENGLAND  :— 

Student's  Edition,  2  vols.  125.  cloth. 
People's  Edition,  4  vols.  165.  cloth. 

LORD    MACAULAY'S   MISCELLANEOUS 
WRITINGS  and   SPEECHES. 

Price  6s.  cloth. 

LORD  MACAULAY'S  LAYS  of  ANCIENT 
ROME,  with  IVRY  and  the  ARMADA. 

Price  3s.  6d.  cloth. 


London,  LONGMANS  &  CO. 


THE 

CONSTITUTIONAL    HISTORY 
OF   ENGLAND 

VOL.  III. 


LOKDOJr  :    PBINTED    BT 

8POTTISWOODE    A3JD    CO.,    NEW-STKEKT    8QCABE 

AND    PARLIAIIBST    STREET 


THE 

CONSTITUTIONAL    HISTORY 
OF  ENGLAND 

SINCE    THE  ACCESSION  OF  GEOEGE  THE  THIRD 

I 760- I 860 

BY 

SIE  THOMAS  EESKINE  MAY,   KC.B.   D.C.L. 

WITH    A   NEW   SUPPLEMENTARY   CHAPTER,    1861-71 

IN    THKEE    VOLUMES 
VOL.   IIL 


LONDON 
LONGMANS,     GEEEN,     AND     CO. 

1875 

All     rights     reserved 


CONTENTS 

OF 

THE     THIKD     VOLUME. 
CHAPTER  XI. 


[ 


LIBERTY   OF   THE   SUBJECT. 

Liberty  of  the  subject  the  earliest  of  political  rights 

Gi-eneral  warrants,  1763 

Arrest  of  Wilkes  and  the  printers 

Actions  brought  by  them 

Search-warrant  for  papers :  case  of  Entinck  v.  Carrington 

General  warrants  condemned  by  the  courts,  and  in  Parliament 

Early  cases  of  the  suspension  of  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act 

Habeas  Corpus  Act  suspended,  1794 

Act  of  Indemnity,  1801 

Habeas  Corpus  Act  suspended,  1817 

Bill  of  Indemnity 

Suspension  of  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act  in 

Impressment  for  the  army 

Impressment  for  the  navy 

Revenue  laws         .         .         . 

Imprisonment  of  Crown  debtors 

Imprisonment  for  contempt  of  court 

Arrest  on  mesne  process 

Imprisonment  for  debt    . 

Relief  to  insolvent  debtors 

Slavery  in  England  :  the  Negro  case,  1771 

Negroes  in  Scotland        . 


Ireland 


PAGE 

1 


4 
7 
9 

10 
12 
15 
16 
17 
19 
20 
21 
25 
ib. 
26 
29 
31 
33 
35 
37 


vi  Contents  of  the  Third  Volume. 

PAGE 

Slavery  of  colliers  and  salters  in  Scotland       ....  38 

Abolition  of  colonial  slavery 39 

Employment  of  spies  and  informers i5. 

Relations  of  the  executive  with  informers 42 

Opening  letters  at  the  Post-office 44 

Petition  of  Mazzini  and  others,  1844 46 

Protection  of  foreigners  in  England 49 

AKen  Acts 50 

The  Naturalisation  Act,  1844 63 

Eight  of  asylum  never  impaired 54 

Napoleon's  demands  refused,  1802 ih. 

Principles  on  which  aliens  are  protected           ....  56 

The  Orsini  conspiracy,  1858 .57 

The  Conspiracy  to  Murder  Bill 58 

Extradition  treaties 59 


CHAPTER  XII. 

THE   CHTTECH  AND   EELIGIOUS   LIBERTY. 

Relations  of  the  Church  to  political  history    ....       60 

The  Reformation .61 

Toleration  formerly  unknown .62 

Civil  disabilities  imposed  by.  Elizabeth 63 

Doctrinal  moderation  of  the  Reformation         ....       64 

Rigorous  enforcement  of  conformity        ...         .         .         .65 

Close  relations  of  the  Reformed  Church  with  the  State    .         .       67 

The  Reformation  in  Scotland 68 

The  Reformation  in  Ireland 70 

The  Church  policy  of  James  1 71 

The  Church  and  religion  under  Charles  I.  and  the  Common- 
wealth          73 

Persecution  of  Nonconformists  under  Charles  11.     .        .         .75 

The  Catholics  also  repressed 77 

The  Toleration  Act  of  William  III 78 

Catholics  under  "William  III. 79 

The  Church  policy  of  Anne  and  Ceo.  I.  and  II.        .         .         .       81 
State  of  the  Church  and  religion  on  the  accession  of  Geo.  IIL       82 

Influence  of  "Wesley  and  "Whitefield 85 

Relaxation  of  the  penal  code  commenced         .         .         .         .       88 
General  character  of  the  penal  code        .        *        ...       89 


Contents  of  the  Third  Volume.  vii 


PAGE 


Subscription  to  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  .        ,        .         .91 

Eelief  granted  to  dissenting  ministers  and  schoolmasters,  1779  93 
Prevalent  opinions  concerning  Catholics  ....       94 

TheCatholicEelief  Actof  1778 96 

The  Protestant  riots 97 

Motions  for  the  repeal  of  the  Corporation  and  Test  Acts,  1787- 

1790 100 

TheCatholicEelief  Bill,  1791 106 

Effect  of  the  Test  Act  in  Scotland 108 

Eestraints  on  Scotch  Episcopalians  repealed  .  .  .  .  ti. 
Mr.  Pox's  biU  for  repeal  of  laws  affecting  Unitarians,  1792  .  109 
Eelief  granted  to  the  Irish  Catholics,  1792-93         .         .         .110 

And  to  the  Scotch  Catholics Ill 

Claims  of  relief  to  Quakers 112 

Union  with  Ireland  in  connection  with  Catholic  disabilities     .     115 

Concessions  forbidden  by  Geo.  III. 118 

The  Catholic  question  in  abeyance  .         .         *         .         .119 

Motions  on  the  Catholic  claims  in  1805  ....     120 

The  Whig  ministry  of  1806  and  the  Catholic  question     .         .124 

The  Army  and  Navy  Service  Bill 126 

Anti-Catholic  sentiments  of  the  Portland  ministry  .  .  129 
Catholic  agitation,  1808-11 130 


CHAPTEE  Xm. 

THE   CmJECH   AND   RELIGIOUS   LIBERTY,    CONTINUED. 

The  regency  in  connection  with  religious  liberty     .         .         .133 

Freedom  of  worship  to  Catholic  soldiers          ....  134 

Dissenters  relieved  from  oaths  imposed  by  the  Toleration  Act  135 

The  Catholic  question  in  1812 136 

And  in  1813 140 

Eelief  of  Catholic  officers  in  army  and  navy,  1813  and  1817    .  143 

Catholic  claims,  1815-22 144 

Eoman  Catholic  Peers  Bill,  1822 147 

Position  of  the  Catholic  question  in  1823         ....  149 
Bnis  for  amendment  of  the  marriage  laws  affecting  Eoman 
Catholics  and  dissenters      .         .         .         .         .         .         .151 

Agitation  in  Ireland,  1823-25 154 

The  Irish  franchise,  1825 155 

The  Wellington  ministry 156 


viii        Contents  of  the  Third  Volume. 

PAGE 

Repeal  of  the  Corporation  and  Test  Acts,  1 828        .         .         .     157 

The  Catholic  claims  in  1828 .161 

The  Clare  election 163 

Necessity  of  Catholic  relief  acknowledged  by  the  ministry        .     164 

The  king  consents  to  the  measure 166 

Mr.  Peel  loses  his  seat  at  Oxford 168 

The  Catholic  Eelief  Act,  1829 ih. 

Elective  franchise  in  Ireland 172 

Mr.  O'Connell  and  the  Clare  election 174 

Catholic  emancipation  too  long  deferred  .         .         .         .175 

Quakers  and  others  admitted  to  the  Commons  on  affirmation  .     177 

Jewish  disabilities 178 

Mr.  Grant's  motions  for  relief  to  the  Jews      ....     179 

Jews  admitted  to  corporations 182 

Baron  L.  N.  de  Eothschild  returned  for  London      .         .        .183 

Claims  to  be  sworn ih. 

Case  of  Mr.  Alderman  Salomons 184 

Attempt  to  admit  Jews  by  a  declaration,  1857         .         .         .185 
The  Jewish  Relief  Act,  1858  .        .        .        .        .        .        .186 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

THE   CHTIBCH   AND    EELIGIOUS    LIBEETY,    CONTINUED. 

Marriage  laws  affecting  Roman  Catholics  and  dissenters         .  188 

Dissenters'  Marriage  Bills,  1834-35 190 

Register  of  births,  marriages,  and  deaths        .         .         .         .192 

Dissenters'  Marriage  Act,  1836 ih. 

Dissenters'  burials 193 

Admission  of  dissenters  to  universities 195 

Dissenters'  Chapels  Act 199 

Final  repeal  of  penalties  on  religious  worship          .         .         .  200 

The  law  of  church  rates 201 

Earlier  schemes  for  settling  the  church-rate  question       .         .  203 

The  first  Braintree  case 205 

The  second  Braintree  case ih. 

Bills  for  the  abolition  of  church  rates,  and  present  position  of 

the  question 207 

State  of  the  Church  of  England  towards  the  latter  part  of  the 

last  century 209 

Effect  of  sudden  increase  to  population 211 


Contents  of  the  Third  Volume,  ix 

PAGB 

Causes  adverse  to  the  clergy  in  presence  of  dissent  .         .212 

The  regeneration  of  the  Church 214 

Church  building  and  extension 215 

Ecclesiastical  revenues 2i6 

Tithe  commutation  in  England 218 

Progress  of  dissent 222 

Statistics  of  places  of  worship 223 

Kelations  of  the  Church  to  dissent 224 

And  to  Parliament 226 

The  Papal  aggression,  1850 227 

The  Ecclesiastical  Titles  Bill,  1851 232 

Schisms  in  the  Church  of  England 235 

The  patronage  question 236 

The  Veto  Act,  1834 240 

The  Auchterarder  and  Strathbogie  cases          ....  242 

The  G-eneral  Assembly  address  the  Queen       ....  248 

And  petition  Parliament 250 

The  secession 251 

The  Free  Church  of  Scotland 262 

The  Patronage  Act,  1843 253 

Eeligious  disunion  in  Scotland 254 

The  Church  in  Ireland 255 

Eesistance  to  payment  of  tithes 256 

The  Church  Temporalities  (Ireland)  Act,  1833         .         .        .  260 

The  appropriation  question 261 

The  Irish  Church  commission          .         .         .         .         .         .  263 

Sir  Eobert  Peel's  ministry  overthrown  on  the  appropriation 

question,  1835 .         .         .266 

Eevenues  and  statistics  of  the  Irish  Church    ....  268 

Abandonment  of  the  appropriation  question    .        ,        .        .  ih. 

Commutation  of  tithes  in  Ireland 269 

National  education  in  Ireland 270 

Maynooth  College  .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .  i6. 

The  Queen's  Colleges 273 


X  Contents  of  the  Third  Volume, 


CHAPTER  XV. 


LOCAI,   GOVERNMENT. 

Local  government  the  basis  of  constitutional  freedom 

The  parish  and  the  vestry- 
History  of  English  corporations 
Loss  of  popular  rights    .... 
Abuses  of  close  corporations  . 
Monopoly  of  electoral  rights  . 
The  Municipal  Corporations  Act,  1835  . 
Corporation  of  the  City  of  London  . 
Reform  of  corporate  abuses  in  Scotland  . 
Corporations  in  Ireland  .... 
Their  abuses  :  total  exclusion  of  Catholics 
The  Corporations  (Ireland)  Bills,  1835-39 
The  Irish  Corporations  Act,  1840  . 
Local  Improvement  and  Police  Acts 
Courts  of  Quarter  Sessions      .         .         . 
Distinctive  character  of  counties  and  towns 


PAGE 

275 
276 
278 
279 
280 
282 
283 
286 
287 
290 
291 
292 
295 
296 
297 
298 


CHAPTER  XVI. 


IRELAND  BEFORE  THE  UNION. 

Progress  of  liberty  in  Ireland 299 

The  Irish  Parliament  before  the  Union iJ. 

The  executive  government 302 

Protestant  ascendency 303 

Subordination  of  the  Irish  Parliament  to  the  Grovernment  and 

Parliament  of  England 304 

Commercial  restrictions .     305 

New  era  opened  under  George  III. 306 

The  Irish  Parliament  asserts  its  independence         .         .         .307 

Condition  of  the  people 309 

Partial  removal  of  commercial  restrictions,  1778-79        .         .     310 

The  rise  of  the  volunteers 311 

They  demand  legislative  independence,  1780  .         .        ,        .313 

The  convention  of  Dungannon 314 

Legislative  and  judicial  independence  granted,  1782        .         .316 
Difficulties  of  Irish  independence 317 


Contents  of  the  Third  Volur/ie,  xi 

PAGE 

Agitation  for  Parliamentary  Eeform 319 

Mr.  Pitt's  commercial  measures,  1785 320 

Liberal  measures  of  1792-93 322 

The  United  Irishmen,  1791 ih. 

Feuds  between  Protestants  and  Catholics         ....  324 

The  rebellion  of  1798 325 

The  Union  concerted 327 

Means  by  which  it  was  accomplished 330 

Eesults  of  the  Union 333 

And  of  the  Catholic  Eelief  Act  and  Parliamentary  Keform      .  335 

Freedom  and  equality  of  Ireland    ......  »6. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

BEITISH   COLONIES   AND   DEPENDBNCIES. 

The  rights  and  liberties  of  English  colonists  ....  338 

Ordinary  form  of  colonial  constitutions 339 

Supremacy  of  England  over  the  colonies          ....  340 
Commercial  restrictions  imposed  by  England .         .         .         .341 

Arguments  on  taxation  of  colonies  for  imperial  purposes         .  343 
The  American  Stamp  Act,  1765       .        .        ...        .        .347 

Mr.  Townshend's  colonial  taxes,  1767 350 

Repealed,  except  the  tea  duties 351 

The  attack  on  the  tea  ships  at  Boston 352 

Boston  Port  Act,  1774 353 

Constitution  of  Massachusetts  suspended        .        ,        .        ,  ih. 

Revolt  of  the  American  colonies 355 

Crown  colonies 356 

Canada  and  other  North  American  colonies     ....  357 

Australian  colonies 358 

Transportation 359 

Colonial  administration  after  the  American  war      .         .        .  360 

Colonial  patronage 361 

Effects  of  free  trade  upon  the  political  relation  of  England 

and  her  colonies 363 

Contumacy  of  Jamaica  repressed,  1838 364 

Insurrection  in  Canada :  union  of  the  two  provinces         .         .  365 
Responsible  government  introduced  into  Canada  and  other 

colonies 366 


xii         Contents  of  the  Third  Votume. 

PAGE 

Conflicting  interests  of  England  and  the  colonies     .         .         .  369 

Colonial  democracy ih. 

Military  defence  of  the  colonies 375 

Administration  of  dependencies  unfitted  for  self-government    .  376 

India  under  the  East  India  Company 377 

Mr.  Fox's  India  Bill,  1783 378 

Mr.  Pitt's  India  Bill,  1784 381 

Later  measures 382 

India  transferred  to  the  Crown,  1858      .....  383 

Subsequent  Indian  administration *i' 

Freedom  and  good  government  of  the  British  Empire      .        .  384 

CHAPTER  XVin. 

PEOGBESS   OF  GENEBAX  LEGISLATION. 

Improved  spirit  of  modem  legislation 385 

Kevision  of  official  emoluments 386 

Defects  and  abuses  in  the  law 387 

Law  reforms  already  effected 389 

The  spirit  and  temper  of  the  judges 391 

Merciless  character  of  the  criminal  code 393 

Its  revision 396 

Other  amendments  of  the  criminal  law 398 

Improvement  of  prisons  and  prison  discipline  .         .         .401 

Eeformatories 403 

Establishment  of  police  in  England         .         .         •         •         •  404 

The  old  and  the  new  poor  laws  in  England     ....  405 

In  Scotland  and  Ireland  ....  .         .  408 

Care  and  protection  of  lunatics 409 

Protection  to  women  and  children  in  factories  and  mines  .  411 
Measures  for  the  improvement  of  the  working  classes      .         .      ih. 

Popular  education 412 

Former  commercial  policy 415 

Free  trade 417 

Modem  financial  policy :  its  value  to  the  community       .         .418 
Increase  of  national  expenditure  since  1850    ....     420 
Democracy  discouraged  and  content  promoted  by  good  govern- 
ment   421 

Pressure  of  legislation  since  the  Reform  Act  ....  422 
Foreign  relations  of  England  affected  by  her  freedom  .  .  424 
Conclusion ib. 


Contents  of  the  Third  Vohtme.         xiii 


SUPPLEMENTAEY  CHAPTER. 
1861-1871. 

PAQE 

Constitutional  changes,  1760-1860 425 

Political  tranquillity  under  Lord  Palmerston  ....  426 

Attempts  to  disturb  the  franchises  of  1832      ....  428 

Dissolution  of  Parliament,  1865 429 

Mr.  Gladstone  rejected  by  University  of  Oxford       .         .         .  ih. 

Death  of  Lord  Palmerston      . e6. 

Succeeded  by  Earl  Eussell      .......  ^. 

Eevival  of  parliamentary  reform 430 

Considerations  adverse  to  its  settlement ih. 

Earl  EusseU's  Eeform  BiU 431 

'The  Cave' ib. 

Earl  Grosvenor's  amendment 432 

Bills  for  the  franchise  and  redistribution  of  seats  united          .  ib. 

Continued  opposition  to  the  bill ih. 

Eesignation  of  ministers 433 

Earl  of  Derby  premier,  1866 ih. 

Popular  agitation   .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .  »&.' 

Hyde  Park  riots,  23rd  July,  1866 434 

Impulse  given  to  reform ih. 

Position  of  ministers  in  regard  to  reform         .         .         .         .  435 

Introduction  of  the  question,  1867 «J. 

Mr.  Disraeli's  resolutions 436 

Earl  of  Derby's  Eeform  BiU *6. 

Its  securities  and  compensations     ......  ih. 

Its  ultimate  form 437 

Meeting  in  Hyde  Park,  6th  May,  1867 439 

Boundaries  of  boroughs  and  counties ih. 

Earl  of  Derby  succeeded  by  Mr.  Disraeli         ....  440 

TheScotchEeform  Act,  1868 «*. 

Election  Petitions  and  Corrupt  Practices  Act,  1868          .         .  441 

Constitutional  importance  of  these  measures  .         .         .         .  ih. 
Irish  Church  Question,  1868  .         .         .         .         ,         .         .443 

Mr.  Gladstone's  resolutions 444 

His  Suspensory  Bill *&• 

The  dissolution  of  1868 445 

Its  decisive  results 446 


xii         Contents  of  the  Third  Votume. 

PAGE 

Conflicting  interests  of  England  and  the  colonies     .         .         .  369 

Colonial  democracy ih. 

Military  defence  of  the  colonies 375 

Administration  of  dependencies  unfitted  for  self-government   .  376 

India  under  the  East  India  Company 377 

Mr.  Fox's  India  Bill,  1783 378 

Mr.  Pitt's  India  Bill,  1784 381 

Later  measures 382 

India  transferred  to  the  Crown,  1858      .        .         .        .         .  383 

Subsequent  Indian  administration *^. 

Freedom  and  good  government  of  the  British  Empire      .        •  384 

CHAPTER  XVm. 

FBOGBESS   OF  GENEBAJ.  LEGISLATION. 

Improved  spirit  of  modem  legislation 385 

Revision  of  official  emoluments 386 

Defects  and  abuses  in  the  law 387 

Law  reforms  already  effected 389 

The  spirit  and  temper  of  the  judges 391 

Merciless  character  of  the  criminal  code 393 

Its  revision 396 

Other  amendments  of  the  criminal  law 398 

Improvement  of  prisons  and  prison  discipline  .         .         .401 

Reformatories 403 

Establishment  of  police  in  England 404 

The  old  and  the  new  poor  laws  in  England     ....  405 

In  Scotland  and  Ireland          ....                  •         .  408 

Care  and  protection  of  lunatics 409 

Protection  to  women  and  children  in  factories  and  mines  .      .  411 

Measures  for  the  improvement  of  the  working  classes      .         .  ih. 

Popular  education 412 

Former  commercial  policy 415 

Free  trade 417 

Modem  financial  policy :  its  value  to  the  community       .         .418 
Increase  of  national  expenditure  since  1850    ....  420 
Democracy  discouraged  and  content  promoted  by  good  govern- 
ment    421 

Pressure  of  legislation  since  the  Reform  Act  ....  422 

Foreign  relations  of  England  affected  by  her  freedom      .         .  424 

Conclusion ib. 


> 


Contents  of  the  Third  Voltcme.         xiii 


SUPPLEMENTARY  CHAPTER. 
1861-1871. 

PAGE 

Constitutional  changes,  1760-1860 425 

Political  tranquillity  under  Lord  Palmerston  ....  426 

Attempts  to  disturb  the  franchises  of  1832      ....  428 

Dissolution  of  Parliament,  1865 429 

Mr.  Gladstone  rejected  by  University  of  Oxford       .         .         .  ih. 

Death  of  Lord  Palmerston      . ih. 

Succeeded  by  Earl  Russell      .......  ^. 

Revival  of  parliamentary  reform     .         .         .         .         .         .  430 

Considerations  adverse  to  its  settlement ib. 

Earl  RusseU's  Reform  Bill 431 

'The  Cave' ih. 

Earl  Grosvenor's  amendment 432 

Bills  for  the  franchise  and  redistribution  of  seats  united          .  ii. 

Continued  opposition  to  the  bill ih. 

Resignation  of  ministers 433 

Earl  of  Derby  premier,  1866 ib. 

Popular  agitation ih.' 

Hyde  Park  riots,  23rd  July,  1866 434 

Impulse  given  to  reform %b. 

Position  of  ministers  in  regard  to  reform        . .         .         .         .  435 

Introduction  of  the  question,  1 867 «i- 

Mr.  Disraeli's  resolutions 436 

Earl  of  Derby's  Reform  Bill ih. 

Its  securities  and  compensations     ......  ih. 

Its  ultimate  form 437 

Meeting  in  Hyde  Park,  6th  May,  1867 439 

Boundaries  of  boroughs  and  counties %b. 

Earl  of  Derby  succeeded  by  Mr.  Disraeli         ....  440 

TheScotchReform  Act,  1868 ih. 

Election  Petitions  and  Corrupt  Practices  Act,  1868          .         .  441 

Constitutional  importance  of  these  measures  .         .         .         .  ih. 
Irish  Church  Question,  1868  .         .         .         .         ,         .         .443 

Mr.  Gladstone's  resolutions 444 

His  Suspensory  Bill *&• 

The  dissolution  of  1868 445 

Its  decisive  results ,         .         .  446 


xlv       Contents  of  the  Third  Volume, 

PAGE 

Resignation  of  ministers 446 

Mr.  Gladstone's  administration       .         .         .         .         .         .  447 

The  Irish  Church  Bill,  1869 ib. 

The  Irish  land  bill,  1870         .       > 448 

Settlement  of  the  church-rate  controversy       .         .        .         .  ib. 

University  Tests ,         ,         .         .449 

Ecclesiastical  Titles  Act,  1871         ......  451 

Endowed  Schools  Act,  1869 ib. 

Education  (Scotland)  bill,  1869 ih. 

Elementary  Education  Act,  1870 452 

The  Ballot 463 


CHAPTER  XI. 

LIBERTY  OF  THE  SUBJECT  SECURED  BEFOEE  POLITICAL  PRIVILEGES'. — ■ 
GEXERAL  warrants: — SUSPENSION  OF  HABEAS  CORPUS  ACT: IM- 
PRESSMENT :  —  REVENUE     LAWS    AS     AFFECTING     CIVIL     LIBERTY  : 

COJIMITMENTS   FOB   CONTEMPT  : — ARRESTS   AND    IMPRISONMENT   FOB 

DEBT  : LAST    RELICS    OF   SLAVERY  :  —  SPIES   AND    INFORMERS  : 

OPENING    LETTERS  : — PROTECTION    OF   FOREIGNERS  : — EXTRADITION 
TREATIES. 

During  the  last  hundred  years,  every  institution  has 
been  popularised, — every  public  liberty  ex-  ^^^6^7  of 
tended.  Long  before  this  period,  however,  asJi^d  ^'^^ 
Englishmen  had  enjoyed  personal  liberty,  jSa?''^ 
as  their  birthright.  More  prized  than  any  p'^^^s^s- 
other  civil  right,  and  more  jealously  guarded, — it 
had  been  secured  earlier  than  those  political  privi- 
leges, of  which  we  have  been  tracing  the  develop- 
ment. The  franchises  of  Magna  Charta  had  been 
firmly  established  in  the  seventeenth  century.  The 
Star  Chamber  had  fallen :  the  power  of  arbitrary 
imprisonment  had  been  wrested  from  the  crown  and 
privy  council;  liberty  had  been  guarded  by  the 
Habeas  Corpus  Act :  judges  redeemed  from  depend- 
ence and  corruption ;  and  juries  from  intimidation 
and  servile  compliance.  The  landmarks  of  civil 
liberty  were  fixed  :  but  relics  of  old  abuses  were  yet 
to  be  swept  away;  and  traditions  of  times  less 
favourable  to  freedom  to  be  forgotten.  Much  re- 
mained to  be  done  for  the  consolidation  of  rights 

VOL.  III.  B 


2  Liberty  of  the  Subject. 

already  recognised ;  and  we  may  trace  progress,  not 
less  remarkable  than  that  which  has  characterised 
the  history  of  our  political  liberties. 

Among  the  remnants  of  a  jurisprudence  which 
General  had  favouTcd  prerogative  at  the  expense  of 
1763.  '  liberty,  was  that  of  the  arrest  of  persons 
under  general  warrants,  without  previous  evidence 
of  their  guilt,  or  identification  of  their  persons. 
This  practice  survived  the  Eevolution,  and  was  con- 
tinued without  question,  on  the  ground  of  usage, 
until  the  reign  of  Greorge  III.,  when  it  received  its 
death-blow  from  the  boldness  of  Wilkes,  and  the 
wisdom  of  Lord  Camden.  This  question  was  brought 
to  an  issue  by  No.  45  of  the  '  North  Briton,'  already 
so  often  mentioned.  There  was  the  libel,  but  who 
was  the  libeller  ?  Ministers  knew  not,  nor  waited 
to  inquire,  after  the  accustomed  forms  of  law :  but 
forthwith  Lord  Halifax,  one  of  the  secretaries  of 
state,  issued  a  warrant,  directing  four  messengers, 
taking  with  them  a  constable,  to  search  for  the 
authors,  printers,  and  publishers  ;  and  to  apprehend 
and  seize  them,  together  with  their  papers,  and  bring 
them  in  safe  custody  before  him.  No  one  having 
been  charged,  or  even  suspected, — no  evidence  of 
crime  having  been  offered, — no  one  was  named  in 
this  dread  instrument.  The  offence  only  was  pointed 
at, — ^not  the  offender.  The  magistrate,  who  should 
have  sought  proofs  of  crime,  deputed  this  office  to 
his  messengers.  Armed  with  their  roving  commis- 
sion, they  set  forth  in  quest  of  unknown  offenders  ; 
and  unable  to  take  evidence,  listened  to  rumours, 
idle  tales,  and  curious  guesses.     They  held  in  their 


Geiie7^al  Warrants.  3 

hands  the  liberty  of  every  man,  whom  they  were 
pleased  to  suspect.  Nor  were  they  triflers  in  their 
work.  In  three  days,  they  arrested  no  less  than 
forty-nine  persons  on  suspicion, — many  as  innocent 
as  Lord  Halifax  himself.  Among  the  number  was 
Dryden  Leach,  a  printer,  whom  they  took  from  his 
bed  at  night.  They  seized  his  papers  ;  and  even  ap- 
prehended his  journeymen  and  servants.  He  had 
printed  one  number  of  the  '  North  Briton,'  and  was 
then  reprinting  some  other  numbers  :  but  as  he  hap- 
pened not  to  have  printed  No.  45,  he  was  released, 
without  being  brought  before  Lord  Halifax.  They 
succeeded,  however,  in  arresting  Kearsley,  the  pub- 
lisher, and  Balfe  the  printer,  of  the  obnoxious  num- 
ber, with  all  their  workmen.  From  them  it  was 
discovered  that  Wilkes  was  the  culprit  of  whom  they 
were  in  search:  but  the  evidence  was  not  on  oath; 
and  the  messengers  received  verbal  directions  to  ap- 
prehend Wilkes,  under  the  general  warrant.  Wilkes, 
far  keener  than  the  crown  lawyers,  not  seeing  his 
own  name  there,  declared  it  'a  ridiculous  warrant 
against  the  whole  English  nation,'  and  refused  to 
obey  it.  But  after  being  in  custody  of  the  ^^^^^  ^^ 
messengers  for  some  hours,  in  his  own  ^i"^«s. 
house,  he  was  taken  away  in  a  chair,  to  appear  before 
the  secretaries  of  state.  No  sooner  had  he  been  re- 
moved, than  the  messengers,  returning  to  his  house, 
proceeded  to  ransack  his  drawers ;  and  carried  off 
all  his  private  papers,  including  even  his  will  and 
pocket-book.  When  brought  into  the  presence  of 
Lord  Halifax  and  Lord  Egremont,  questions  were 
put  to  Wilkes,  which  he  refused  to  answer :  where- 
B  2 


4  Liberty  of  the  Subject. 

upon  lie  was  committed,  close  prisoner,  to  the  Tower, 
A  riisoth  — denied  the  use  of  pen  and  paper,  and 
1763.  interdicted   from  receiving   the   visits   of 

his  friends,  or  even  of  his  professional  advisers. 
Mav  2nd  From  this  imprisonment,  however,  he  was 
1763.  shortly    released,   on    a    writ   of    habeas 

corpus,  by  reason  of  his  privilege,  as  a  member  of 
the  House  of  Commons.^ 

Wilkes  and  the  printers,  supported  by  Lord  Tem- 
ple's liberality,  soon  questioned  the  legality  of  the 
general  warrant.  First,  several  journeymen  printers 
Actions  brought  actions  against  the  messengers. 
messengers,    Qu  the  first  trial,  Lord  Chief  Justice  Pratt, 

July  6th,  '  .     ' 

1763.  — not  allowing  bad  precedents  to  set  aside 

the  sound  principles  of  English  law, — held  that  the 
general  warrant  was  illegal :  that  it  was  illegally 
executed  ;  and  that  the  messengers  were  not  indem- 
nified by  statute.  The  journeymen  recovered  300^. 
damages;  and  the  other  plaintiffs  also  obtained 
verdicts.  In  all  these  cases,  however,  bills  of  ex- 
ceptions were  tendered  and  allowed. 

Mr.  "Wilkes  himself  brought  an  action  against  Mr. 
Wilkes*  ac-  Wood,  uudcr-sccretary  of  state,  who  had 
WTOdfSS*  personally  superintended  the  execution  of 
oth,  1763.  ^j^g  warrant.  At  this  trial  it  was  proved 
that  Mr.  Wood  and  the  messengers,  after  Wilkes' 
removal  in  custody,  had  taken  entire  possession  of 
his  house,  refusing  admission  to  his  friends;  had 
sent  for  a  blacksmith,  who  opened  the  drawers  of 
his  bureau ;  and  having  taken  out  the  papers,  had 
carried  them  away  in  a  sack,  without  taking  any  list 

»  Almon's  Corr.  of  Wilkes,  i.  95-124;  iii.  196-210,  &c. 


General  Warrants.  5 

or  inventory.  All  his  private  manuscripts  were 
seized,  and  his  pocket-book  filled  up  the  mouth  of 
the  sack.^  Lord  Halifax  was  examined,  and  admit- 
ted that  the  warrant  had  been  made  out,  three  days 
before  he  had  received  evidence  that  "Wilkes  was 
the  author  of  the  '  North  Briton.'  Lord  Chief  Jus- 
tice Pratt  thus  spoke  of  the  warrant : — '  The  defen- 
dant claimed  a  right,  under  precedents,  to  force 
persons'  houses,  break  open  escritoires,  and  seize 
their  papers,  upon  a  general  warrant,  where  no  in- 
ventory is  made  of  the  things  thus  taken  away,  and 
where  no  offenders'  names  are  specified  in  the  war- 
rant, and  therefore  a  discretionary  power  given 
to  messengers  to  search  wherever  their  suspicions 
may  chance  to  fall.  If  such  a  power  is  truly  in- 
vested in  a  secretary  of  state,  and  he  can  delegate 
this  power,  it  certainly  may  affect  the  person  and 
property  of  eveiy  man  in  this  kingdom,  and  is  totally 
subversive  of  the  liberty  of  the  subject.'  The 
jury  found  a  verdict  for  the  plaintiff,  with  1000^. 
damages.^ 

Four  days  after  Wilkes  had  obtained  his  verdict 
against  Mr.  Wood,  Dryden  Leach,  the  prin-  Leach  v. 
ter,  gained  another  verdict,  with  400L  dam-  10th,  i763. ' 
ages,  against  the  messengers.  A  bill  of  exceptions, 
however,  was  tendered  and  received  in  this,  as  in 
other  cases,  and  came  on  for  hearing  before  the 
Court  of  King's  Bench,  in  1756.  After  much  argu- 
ment, and  the  citing  of  precedents  showing  the 
practice  of  the  secretary  of  state's  office  ever  since 

•  So  stated  by  Lord  Camden  in  Entinck  v.  Carrington. 
2  Lofft's  Keports,  St,  Tr.,  xix.  1153. 


6  Liberty  of  the  Stcbject. 

the  Revolution,  Lord  Mansfield  pronounced  the 
warrant  illegal,  saying,  '  It  is  not  fit  that  the  judging 
of  the  information  should  be  left  to  the  discretion  of 
the  officer.  The  magistrate  should  judge  and  give 
certain  directions  to  the  officer.'  The  other  three 
judges  agreed  that  the  warrant  was  illegal  and 
bad,  believing  that  '  no  degree  of  antiquity  can  give 
sanction  to  an  usage  bad  in  itself.'^  The  judg- 
ment was  therefore  affirmed. 

Wilkes  had  also  brought  actions  for  false  im- 
wiikes  and  prisoumcut  agaiust  both  the  secretaries  of 
fax.  state.     Lord  Egremont's  death  put  an  end 

to  the  action  against  him;  and  Lord  Halifax,  by 
pleading  privilege,  and  interposing  other  delays  un- 
worthy of  his  position  and  character,  contrived  to 
put  off  his  appearance  until  after  Wilkes  had  been 
outlawed, — when  he  appeared  and  pleaded  the  out- 
lawry. But  at  length,  in  1769,  no  further  postpone- 
ment could  be  contrived, — the  action  was  tried,  and 
Wilkes  obtained  no  less  than  4000^.  damages.^  Not 
only  in  this  action,  but  throughout  the  proceedings 
in  which  persons  aggrieved  by  the  general  warrant 
had  sought  redress,  the  government  offered  an  ob- 
stinate and  vexatious  resistance.  The  defendants 
were  harassed  by  every  obstacle  which  the  law  per- 
mitted, and  subjected  to  ruinous  costs.^     The  ex- 

•  Burrow's  Eep.,  iii.  1742  ;  St.  Tr.,  xix.  1001 ;  Sir  W.  Blackstone's 
Eep.,  655. 

-  Wilson's  Eep.,  ii.  256 ;  Almon's  Correspondence  of  Wilkes,  iv. 
13  ;  Adolph.  Hist.,  i.  136,  n. ;  St.  Tr.,xix.  1406. 

'  On  a  motion  for  a  new  trial  in  one  of  these  numerous  cases  on 
the  ground  of  excessive  damages,  Ch.  Justice  Pratt  said :  '  They 
heard  the  king's  counsel,  and  saw  the  solicitor  of  the  treasury  en- 
deavouring to  support  and  maintain  the  legality  of  the  warrant  in  a 
tyrannical  and  severe  manner.' — St.  Tr.,  xix.  1405. 


General  Warrants.  7 

penses  which  government  itself  incurred  in  these 
various  actions  were  said  to  have  amounted  to 
100,000^.1 

The  liberty  of  the  subject  was  further  assured,  at 
this  period,  by  another  remarkable  judg-  gearch-war- 
ment  of  Lord  Camden.  In  November,  1762,  ^^^^^,^^. 
the  Earl  of  Halifax,  as  secretary  of  state,  riSon,^'^" 
had  issued  a  warrant  directing  certain  ^'^^" 
messengers,  taking  a  constable  to  their  assistance, 
to  search  for  John  Entinck,  Clerk,  the  author,  or 
one  concerned  in  the  writing,  of  several  numbers  of 
the  '  Monitor,  or  British  Freeholder,'  and  to  seize 
him,  '  together  with  his  books  and  papers,'  and  to 
bring  them  in  safe  custody  before  the  secretary  of 
state.  In  execution  of  this  warrant,  the  messengers 
apprehended  Mr.  Entinck  in  his  house,  and  seized 
the  books  and  papers  in  his  bureau,  writing-desk, 
and  drawers.  This  case  differed  from  that  of  Wilkes, 
as  the  warrant  specified  the  name  of  the  person 
against  whom  it  was  directed.  In  respect  of  the 
person,  it  was  not  a  general  warrant :  but  as  regards 
the  papers,  it  was  a  general  search-warrant, — not 
specifying  any  particular  papers  to  be  seized,  but 
giving  authority  to  the  messengers  to  take  all  his 
books  and  papers,  according  to  their  discretion. 

Mr.  Entinck  brought  an  action  of  trespass  against 
the  messengers  for  the  seizure  of  his  papers,^  upon 
which  the  jury  foimd  a  special  verdict  with  300^. 
damages.  This  special  verdict  was  twice  learnedly 
argued  before  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas,  where  at 

'  Almon's  Corr.  of  Wilkes. 

'  Entinck  v.  Carrington,  St.  Tr.,  xix.  1030. 


8  Liberty  of  the  Subject. 

length,  in  1765,  Lord  Camden  pronounced  an  elabo- 
rate judgment.  He  even  doubted  the  right  of  the 
secretary  of  state  to  commit  persons  at  all,  except 
for  high  treason :  but  in  deference  to  prior  decisions^ 
the  court  felt  bound  to  acknowledge  the  right.  The 
main  question,  however,  was  the  legality  of  a  search- 
warrant  for  papers.  '  If  this  point  should  be  deter- 
mined in  favour  of  the  jurisdiction,'  said  Lord  Cam- 
den, 'the  secret  cabinets  and  bureaus  of  every 
subject  in  this  kingdom  will  be  thrown  open  to  the 
search  and  inspection  of  a  messenger,  whenever  the 
secretary  of  state  shall  think  fit  to  charge,  or  even 
suspect,  a  person  to  be  the  author,  printer,  or  pub- 
lisher of  a  seditious  libel.'  '  This  power,  so  as- 
sumed by  the  secretary  of  state,  is  an  execution 
upon  all  the  party's  papers  in  the  first  instance. 
His  house  is  rifled,  his  most  valuable  papers  are 
taken  out  of  his  possession,  before  the  paper,  for 
which  he  is  charged,  is  found  to  be  criminal  by  any 
competent  jurisdiction,  and  before  he  is  convicted 
either  of  writing,  publishing,  or  being  concerned  in 
the  paper.'  It  had  been  found  by  the  special  ver- 
dict that  many  such  warrants  had  been  issued  since 
the  Kevolution :  but  he  wholly  denied  their  le- 
gality. He  referred  the  origin  of  the  practice  to 
the  Star  Chamber,  which  in  pursuit  of  libels  had 
given  search-warrants  to  their  messenger  of  the  press, 
— a  practice  which,  after  the  abolition  of  the  Star 
Chamber,  had  been  revived  and  authorised  by  the 
Licensing  Act  of  Charles  II.  in  the  person  of  the 

^  Queen  v.  Derby,  Fort.,  140,  and  R.  v.  Earbury,  2  Barnadist,  293, 
346. 


General  Warrants,  9 

secretary  of  state.  And  lie  conjectured  tliat  this 
practice  had  been  continued  after  the  expiration  of 
that  act, — a  conjecture  shared  by  Lord  Mansfield 
and  the  Court  of  King's  Bench.  ^  With  the  unani- 
mous concurrence  of  the  other  judges  of  his  court, 
this  eminent  magistrate  now  finally  condemned  this 
dangerous  and  unconstitutional  practice. 

Meanwhile,  the  legality  of  a  general  warrant  had 
been  repeatedly  discussed  in  Parliament.^  General 
Several  motions  were  offered,  in  different  S™5in 
forms,  for  declaring  it  unlawful.  While  ^^^"^«^t. 
trials  were  still  pending,  there  were  obvious  abjec- 
tions to  any  proceeding  by  which  the  judgment  of 
the  courts  would  be  anticipated :  but  in  debate,  such 
a  warrant  found  few  supporters.  Those  who  were 
unwilling  to  condemn  it  by  a  vote  of  the  House, 
had  little  to  say  in  its  defence.  Even  the  attorney 
and  solicitor-general  did  not  venture  to  pronounce 
it  legal.  But  whatever  their  opinion,  the  com- 
petency of  the  House  to  decide  any  matter  of  law 
was  contemptuously  denied.  Sir  Fletcher  Norton, 
the  attorney-general,  even  went  so  far  as  to  declare 
that  '  he  should  regard  a  resolution  of  the  members 
of  the  House  of  Commons  no  more  than  the  oaths 
of  so  many  drunken  porters  in  Covent  Grarden,' — a 
sentiment  as  unconstitutional  as  it  was  insolent. 
Mr.  Pitt  afiirmed  '  that  there  was  not  a  man  to  be 
found  of  sufficient  profligacy  to  defend  this  warrant 
upon  the  principle  of  legality.' 

'  Leach  v.  Money  and  others,  Burrow's  Rep.,  iii.  1692,  1767;  Sir 
"W,  Blackstone's  Rep.,  555.  The  same  view  was  also  adopted  by 
Blackstone,  Comm.,  iv,  336,  n.  (Kerr's  Ed.,  1862.) 

2  Jan.  19th,  Feb.  3rd,  6th,  13th,  14th,  and  17th,  1764;  Pari. Hist, 
XV.  1393-1418    Jan.  29th,  1765;  /6^t/.,  xvi.  6. 


I  o  L  iberty  of  the  Subject. 

In  1766,  the  Court  of  King's  Bench  had  con- 
Resoiutions  demned  the  warrant,  and  the  objections  to 
Commons,      a    declaratory    resolution   were    therefore 

April  22nd,  '' 

1T6G.  removed ;  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  had 

pronounced  a  search-warrant  for  papers  to  be  illegal ; 
and  lastly,  the  more  liberal  administration  of  the 
Marquess  of  Eockingham  had  succeeded  to  that  of 
Mr.  Grrenville.  Accordingly,  resolutions  were  now 
agreed  to,  condemning  general  warrants,  whether 
for  the  seizure  of  persons  or  papers,  as  illegal ;  and 
declaring  them,  if  executed  against  a  member,  to 
be  a  breach  of  privilege.^ 

A  bill 'was  introduced  to  carry  into  effect  these 
Deciara.  rcsolutious,  and  passed  by  the  House  of 
Aprii^Sth  Commons:  but  was  not  agreed  to  by  the 
^'^®*  Lords.2     A  declaratory  act  was,  however, 

no  longer  necessary.  The  illegality  of  general  war- 
rants had  been  judicially  determined,  and  the  judg- 
ment of  the  courts  confirmed  by  the  House  of 
Commons,  and  approved  as  well  by  popular  opinion, 
as  by  the  first  statesmen  of  the  time.  The  cause  of 
public  liberty  had  beon  vindicated,  and  was  hence- 
forth secure. 

The  wi-it  of  Habeas  Corpus  is  unquestionably  the 
Suspension     first  securitv  of  civil  liberty.     It  brinsrs  to 

of  Habeas        ,.    ,  ,         "^  ^  -^  .  .  ^ 

Corpus  Act.  light  the  cause  of  every  imprisonment, 
approves  its  lawfulness,  or  liberates  the  prisoner. 
It  exacts  obedience  from  the  highest  courts :  Par- 
liament itself  submits  to  its  authority.^  No  right 
is  more  justly  valued.     It  protects  the  subject  from 

1  Pari.  Hist.,  xvi.  209.  =  Ibid.,  210. 

'  May's  Law  and  Usage  of  Parliament,  p.  lb  (6th  Ed.). 


StLspensio7i  of  Hq,beas  Corpus  Act,       1 1 

tinfounded  suspicions,  from  the  aggressions  of  power, 
and  from  abuses  in  the  administration  of  justice.' 
Yet  this  protective  law,  which  gives  every  man 
security  and  confidence,  in  times  of  tranquillity,  has 
been  suspended,  again  and  again,  in  periods  of 
public  danger  or  apprehension.  Earely,  however, 
has  this  been  suffered  without  jealousy,  hesitation, 
and  remonstrance ;  and  whenever  the  perils  of  the 
state  have  been  held  sufficient  to  warrant  this  sacri- 
fice of  personal  liberty,  no  minister  or  magistrate 
has  been  suffered  to  tamper  with  the  law,  at  his 
discretion.  Parliament  alone,  convinced  of  the  exi- 
gency of  each  occasion,  has  suspended,  for  a  time, 
the  rights  of  individuals,  in  the  interests  of  the 
state. 

The  first  years  after  the  Eevolution  were  full  of 
danger.     A  dethroned  king,  aided  by  fo-  cases  from 
reign   enemies,  and   a   powerful   body   of  SSflo' 
English   adherents,   was    threatening   the  ^'^^^' 
new  settlement  of  the  crown  with  war  and  treason. 
Hence    the   liberties   of   Englishmen,   so   recently 
assured,  were  several  times  made  to  yield  to  the 
exigencies  of  the  state.     Again,  on  occasions  of  no 
less  peril, — the  rebellion  of  1715,  the  Jacobite  con- 
spiracy of  1722,  and  the  invasion  of  the  realm  by 
the  Pretender   in  1745, — the   Habeas  Corpus  Act 
was  suspended.^     Henceforth,  for  nearly  half  a  cen- 
tury,  the    law    remained    inviolate.      Dming   the 

'  Blackstone's  Coram.  (Kerr),  iii.  138-147,  &c. 

2  Pari.  Hist.,  viii.  27-39  ;  xiii.  671.  In  1745  it  was  stated  by  the 
solicitor-general  that  the  act  had  been  suspended  nine  times  since  the 
Eevolution ;  and  in  1794  Mr.  Secretary  Dundas  made  a  similar  state 
ment. — Tarl.  Hist.,  xxx.  539. 


1 2  Liberty  of  the  Subject. 

American  war,  indeed,  it  had  been  necessary  to  em- 
power the  king  to  secure  persons  suspected  of  high 
treason,  committed  in  North  America,  or  on  the 
high  seas,  or  of  the  crime  of  piracy :  ^  but  it  was 
not  until  1794  that  the  civil  liberties  of  English- 
men, at  home,  were  again  to  be  suspended.  The 
dangers  and  alarms  of  that  dark  period  have  already 
been  recounted.^  Ministers,  believing  the  state  to 
be  threatened  by  traitorous  conspiracies,  once  more 
sought  power  to  countermine  treason  by  powers 
beyond  the  law. 

Kelying  upon  the  report  of  a  secret  committee. 
Habeas  -^^^^  ^^'^^  Hiovcd  for  a  bill  to  empower  His 
suSSJsion  Majesty  to  secure  and  detain  persons  sus- 
Act,  1794.  pected  of  conspiring  against  his  person  and 
May  16th.  government.  He  justified  this  measure  on 
the  ground,  that  whatever  the  temporary  danger  of 
placing  such  power  in  the  hands  of  the  government, 
it  was  far  less  than  the  danger  with  which  the  con- 
stitution and  society  were  threatened.  If  ministers 
abused  the  power  entrusted  to  them,  they  would  be 
responsible  for  its  abuse.  It  was  vigorously  opposed 
by  Mr.  Fox,  Mr.  Grey,  Mr.  Sheridan,  and  a  small 
body  of  adherents.  They  denied  the  disaffection 
imputed  to  the  people,  ridiculed  the  revelations  of 
the  committee,  and  declared  that  no  such  dangers 
threatened  the  state  as  would  justify  the  surrender 
of  the  chief  safeguard  of  personal  freedom.  This 
measure  would  give  ministers  absolute  power  over 
every  individual  in  the  kingdom.      It  would  em- 

»  In  1777,  act  17  aeo.  III.  c.  9.  «  Sii-pra,  Vol.  II.  p.  302. 


Suspension  of  Habeas  Corptis  Act.       13 

power  them  to  arrest,  on  suspicion,  any  man  whose 
opinions  were  obnoxious  to  them, — the  advocates  of 
reform, — even  the  members  of  the  parliamentary 
opposition.  Who  would  be  safe,  when  conspiracies 
were  everywhere  suspected,  and  constitutional  ob- 
jects and  language  believed  to  be  the  mere  cloak  of 
sedition  ?  Let  every  man  charged  with  treason  be 
brought  to  justice  ;  in  the  words  of  Sheridan,  '  where 
there  was  guilt,  let  the  broad  axe  fall ; '  but  why 
surrender  the  liberties  of  the  innocent  ? 

Yet  thirty-nine  members  only  could  be  found  to 
oppose  the  introduction  of  the  bill.^  Ministers, 
representing  its  immediate  urgency,  endeavoured  to 
pass  it  at  once  through  all  its  stages.  The  opposi- 
tion, unable  to  resist  its  progress  by  numbers,  en- 
deavoured to  arrest  its  passing  for  a  time,  in  order 
to  appeal  to  the  judgment  of  the  country :  but  all 
their  efforts  were  vain.  With  free  institutions,  the 
people  were  now  governed  according  to  the  prin- 
ciples of  despotism.  The  will  of  their  rulers  was 
supreme,  and  not  to  be  questioned.  After  eleven 
divisions,  the  bill  was  pressed  forward  as  far  as  the 
report,  on  the  same  night ;  and  the  galleries  being 
closed,  the  arguments  urged  against  it  were  merely 
addressed  to  a  determined  and  taciturn  majority. 
On  the  following  day,  the  bill  was  read  a  third  time 
and  sent  up  to  the  Lords,  by  whom,  after  some 
sharp  debates,  it  was  speedily  passed.^ 

The  strongest  opponents  of  the  measure,  while 
denying  its  present  necessity,  admitted  that  when 

»  Ayes,  201  ;  Noes,  39.  2  p^ri.  Hist.,  xxxi.  497,  621,  525. 


14  Liberty  of  the  Subject. 

danger  is  imminent,  the  liberty  of  the  subject  must 
be  sacrificed  to  the  paramount  interests  of  the  state. 
orounds  Ringleaders  must  be  seized,  outrages  an- 
ra(?te?of  ticipated,  plots  disconcerted,  and  the  dark 
the  measure,  jjaunts  of  couspiracy  filled  with  distrust 
and  terror.  And  terrible  indeed  was  the  power  now 
entrusted  to  the  executive.  Though  termed  a  sus- 
pension of  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act,  it  was,  in  truth, 
a  suspension  of  Magna  Charta,^  and  of  the  cardinal 
principles  of  the  common  law.  Every  man  had  hither- 
to been  free  from  imprisonment  until  charged  with 
crime,  by  information  upon  oath  ;  and  entitled  to  a 
speedy  trial  and  the  judgment  of  his  peers.  But 
any  subject  could  now  be  arrested  on  suspicion  of 
treasonable  practices,  without  specific  charge  or  proof 
of  guilt :  his  accusers  were  unknown ;  and  in  vain 
might  he  demand  public  accusation  and  trial.  Spies 
and  treacherous  accomplices,  however  circumstantial 
in  their  narratives  to  secretaries  of  state  and  law 
officers,  shrank  from  the  witness-box;  and  their 
victims  rotted  in  gaol.  Whatever  the  judgment, 
temper,  and  good  faith  of  the  executive,  such  a 
power  was  arbitrary,  and  could  scarcely  fail  to  be 
abused.^  Whatever  the  dangers  by  which  it  was 
justified, — never  did  the  subject  so  much  need  the 
protection  of  the  laws,  as  when  government  and 
society  were  filled  with  suspicion  and  alarm. 

•  '  NuUus  liber  homo  capiatur  aut  imprisonetiir,  nisi  per  legale 
judicium  parium  suorum.'  ...  .  '  Nulli  negabimus,  nulli  dif- 
feremus  justiciam.' 

2  Blackstone  says :  '  It  has  happened  in  England  during  temporary 
suspensions  of  the  statute,  that  persons  apprehended  upon  suspicion 
have  suiFered  a  long  imprisonment,  merely  becaiise  they  were  for- 
gotten.'— Comm.,  iii.  (Kerr),  146. 


Sicspensioii  of  Habeas  Corpus  Act.       15 

Notwithstanding  the  failure  of  the  state  prosecu- 
tions, and  the  discredit  cast  upon  the  evi-  its  con- 

f.        ,       'i  .  1  •    1      tinuance; 

dence  of  a  traitorous  conspiracy,  on  which  1794-1800. 
the  Suspension  Act  had  been  expressly  founded, 
ministers  declined  to  surrender  the  invidious  power 
with  which  they  had  been  entrusted.  Strenuous 
resistance  was  offered  by  the  opposition  to  the  con- 
tinuance of  the  act :  but  it  was  renewed  again  and 
again,  so  long  as  the  public  apprehensions  con- 
tinued. From  1798  to  1800,  the  increased  malignity 
and  violence  of  English  democrats,  and  their  com- 
plicity with  Irish  treason,  repelled  further  objections 
to  this  exceptional  law.^ 

At  length,  at  the  end  of  1801,  the  act  being  no 
longer   defensible   on   grounds   of   public  Habeas 
danger,  was  suffered  to  expire,  after  a  con-  suspension 

.  o       T-.  Act  expired 

tinuous  operation  of  eight  years.^  But  1801. 
before  its  operation  had  ceased,  a  bill  was  introduced 
to  indemnify  all  persons  wlio  since  the  1st  of 
Februaiy,  1793,  had  acted  in  the  apprehension  of 
persons  suspected  of  high  treason.  A  measure  de- 
signed to  protect  the  ministers  and  their  agents 
from  responsibility,  on  account  of  acts  extending 
over  a  period  of  eight  years,  was  not  suffered  to  pass 
without  strenuous  opposition.^  When  extraordinary 
powers  had  first  been  sought,  it  was  said  that  minis- 

•  In  1798  there  were  only  seven  votes  against  its  renewal.  In 
1800  it  was  opposed  by  twelve  in  the  Commons,  and  by  three  in  the 
Lords.  It  was  then  stated  that  twenty-nine  persons  had  been  im- 
prisoned, some  for  more  than  two  years,  without  being  brought  to 
trial. — l?arl.  Hist.,  xxxiv.  1484. 

-  The  act  41  Geo.  III.  c.  26,  expired  six  weeks  after  the  com- 
mencement of  the  next  session,  which  commenced  on  the  29th  of 
Oct.,  in  the  same  year. 

»  Pari.  Hist.,  xxxv.  1507-1549. 


1 6  Liberty  of  the  Stibject. 

ters  would  be  responsible  for  their  proper  exercise ; 
and  now  every  act  of  authority,  every  neglect  or 
abuse,  was  to  be  buried  in  oblivion.  It  was  stated 
in  debate  that  some  persons  had  suffered  imprison- 
ment for  three  years,  and  one  for  six,  without  being- 
brought  to  trial ;  *  and  Lord  Thurlow  could  '  not 
resist  the  impulse  to  deem  men  innocent  until  tried 
and  convicted.'  The  measure  was  defended,  how- 
ever, on  the  ground  that  persons  accused  of  abuses 
would  be  unable  to  defend  themselves,  without  dis- 
closing secrets  dangerous  to  the  lives  of  indi- 
viduals, and  to  the  state.  Unless  the  bill  were  passed, 
those  channels  of  information  would  be  stopped,  on 
which  government  relied  for  guarding  the  public 
peace.^  When  all  the  accustomed  forms  of  law  had 
been  departed  from,  the  justification  of  the  execu- 
tive would  indeed  have  been  difficult :  but  evil 
times  had  passed,  and  a  veil  was  drawn  over  them. 
If  dangerous  powers  had  been  misused,  they  were 
covered  by  an  amnesty.  It  were  better  to  withhold 
such  powers,  than  to  scrutinise  their  exercise  too 
curiously ;  and  were  any  further  argument  needed 
against  the  suspension  of  the  law,  it  would  be  found 
in  the  reasons  urged  for  indemnity. 

For  several  years,  the  ordinary  law  of  arrest  was 
o  »~.  'r.^     free  from  further   invasion.     But  on  the 

Stispension 

c!o5us!St,  fi^^^  appearance  of  popular  discontents 
•^^^^'  and  combinations,  the  government  resorted 

to  the  same  ready  expedient  for  strengthening  the 
hands  of  the  executive,  at  the  expense  of  public 
liberty.     The  suspension  of  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act 
»  Pari.  Hist.,  xxxv.  1517.  =  Ibid.,  1510. 


StLSpension  of  Habeas  Corpus  Act.       17 

formed  part  of  Lord  Sidmouth's  repressive  measures 
in  1817,'  -when  it  was  far  less  defensible  than  in 
1794.  At  the  first  period,  the  French  Ke volution 
was  still  raging :  its  consequences  no  man  could 
foresee ;  and  a  deadly  war  had  broken  out  witli 
the  revolutionary  government  of  France.  Here,  at 
least,  there  may  have  been  grounds  for  extraordinary 
precautions.  But  in  1817,  France  was  again  settled 
under  the  Bourbons :  the  revolution  had  worn  itself 
out :  Europe  was  again  at  peace ;  and  the  state  was 
threatened  with  no  danger  but  domestic  discontent 
and  turbulence. 

Again  did  ministers,  having  received  powers  to 
apprehend  and  detain  in  custody  persons  bui  of  in. 

^^  "^    ^  demnity, 

suspected  of  treasonable  practices, — and,  1817. 
having  imprisoned  many  men  without  bringing  them 
to  trial, — seek  indemnity  for  all  concerned  in  the 
exercise  of  these  powers,  and  in  the  suppression  of 
tumultuous  assemblies.^  Magistrates  had  seized 
papers  and  arms,  and  interfered  with  meetings, 
under  circumstances  not  warranted  even  by  the  ex- 
ceptional powers  entrusted  to  them :  but  having 
acted  in  good  faith  for  the  repression  of  tumults 
and  sedition,  they  claimed  protection.  This  bill 
was  not  passed  without  a  spirited  resistance.  The 
executive  had  not  been  idle  in  the  exercise  of  its 
extraordinary  powers.  Ninety-six  persons  had  been 
arrested  on  suspicion.  Of  these,  forty-four  were 
taken  by  warrant  of  the  secretary  of  state  ;  four  by 
warrant  of  the  privy  council :  the  remainder  on  the 

>  Swpra,  Vol.  II.  p.  373. 

2  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxxv.  491,  551,  643,  708,  795,  &c. ;  5Z 
Geo.  III.  c.  55 ;  repealed  by  58  Geo.  III.  c.  1. 
VOL.  III.  C 


i8  Liberty  of  the  Stcbject. 

warrants  of  magistrates.  Not  one  of  those  arrested 
on  the  warrant  of  the  secretary  of  state  had  been 
brought  to  trial.  The  four  arrested  on  the  warrant 
of  the  privy  council  were  tried  and  acquitted.^ 
Prisoners  had  been  moved  from  prison  to  prison  in 
chains;  and  after  long,  painful,  and  even  solitary 
imprisonment,  discharged  on  their  recognisances, 
without  trial.^ 

Numerous  petitions  were  presented,  complaining 
Petitions  ^^  crueltios  and  hardships;  and  though 
in^S?"^  falsehood  and  exaggeration  characterised 
iu-usage.  many  of  their  statements,  the  justice  of 
inquiry  was  insisted  on,  before  a  general  indemnity 
was  agreed  to.  '  They  were  called  upon,'  said  Mr. 
Lambton,  '  to  throw  an  impenetrable  veil  over  all 
the  acts  of  tyranny  and  oppression  that  had  been 
committed  under  the  Suspension  Act.  They  were 
required  to  stifle  the  voice  of  just  complaint, — to 
disregard  the  numerous  petitions  that  had  been  pre- 
sented, arraigning  the  conduct  of  ministers,  detail- 
ing acts  of  cruelty  unparalleled  in  the  annals  of  the 
Bastile,  and  demanding  full  and  open  investigation.'^ 
But  on  behalf  of  government,  it  appeared  that  in  no 
instance  had  warrants  of  detention  been  issued, 
except  on  information  upon  oath;''  and  the  attorney- 
general  declared  that  none  of  the  prisoners  had  been 

'  Lords'  Report  on  the  state  of  the  country.  In  ten  other  cases 
the  parties  had  escaped,  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxxviL  673 ;  Sir  M. 
W.  Ridley,  March  9th,  1818  ;  Ihid.,  901. 

2  Petitions  of  Benbow,  Drummond,  Bagguley,  Leach,  Scholes, 
Ogden,  and  others — Hans.  Deb,,  1st  Ser.,  xxxvii.  438,  441,  453, 
461,  519. 

3  March  9th,  1818;  Hans.  Deb,,  1st  Ser,,  xxsvii,  891. 

*  Lords'  Rep.  on  State  of  the  Nation,  Hans,  Deb,,  1st  Ser.,  xsxyii. 
674. 


Suspension  of  Habeas  Corpics  Act.       19 

deprived  of  liberty  for  a  single  hour,  on  the  evidence 
of  informers  alone,  which  was  never  acted  on,  unless 
corroborated  by  other  undoubted  testimony.^ 

Indemnity  was  granted  for  the  past :  but  the  dis- 
cussions which  it  provoked,  disclosed,  more  ^^beas 
forcibly  than  ever,  the  hazard  of  permit-  JSi^ce 
ting  the  even  course  of  the  law  to  be  inter-  ^p^*^ 
rupted.     They   were    not   without    their   warning. 
Even  Lord  Sidmouth  was  afterwards  satisfied  with 
the  rigorous  provisions  of  the  Six  Acts ;  and,  while 
stifling  public  discussion,  did  not  venture  to  propose 
another  forfeiture  of  personal  liberty.     And  happily, 
since  his   time,  ministers,  animated   by   a   higher 
spirit  of  statesmanship,  have  known  how  to  main- 
tain the  authority  of  the  law,  in  England,  without 
the  aid  of  abnormal  powers. 

In  Ireland,    a   less   settled   state    of    society, — 
agrarian   outrages, — feuds   envenomed  by  suspension 
many  deeds  of  blood, — and  dangerous  con-  corpus 
spiracles,  have  too  often  called  for  sacri-  Ireland, 
fices  of  liberty.    Before  the  Union,  a  bloody  rebellion 
demanded  this  security ;  and  since  that  period,  the 
Habeas  Corpus  Act  was  suspended  on  no  less  than 
six  occasions  prior  to  1860.^     The  last  Suspension 
x\ct,  in  1848,  was  rendered  necessary  by  an  imminent 
rebellion,  openly  organised    and  threatened:  when 
tlie  people  were  arming,  and  their  leaders  inciting 

•  Feb.  17th,  1818,  Hans.  Deb.,  IstSer.,  xxxvii.  499,  881,  953,  &c. 

-  It  was  suspended  in  1800,  at  the  very  time  of  the  Union;  from 
1802  till  1805;  from  1807  till  1810;  in  1814;  and  from  1822  till 
1824  ;  subsequently  to  1860,  it  was  suspended,  in  1866;  and  this  sus- 
pension was  twice  continued  until  March  1869.  Again,  in  1871,  it 
was  suspended  in  Westmeath,  and  parts  of  adjacent  counties. 

c2 


20  Liberty  of  the  Subject. 

them  to  massacre  and  plunder.'  Other  measures 
in  restraint  of  crime  and  outrage  have  also  pressed 
upon  the  constitutional  liberties  of  the  Irish  people. 
But  let  us  hope  that  the  rapid  advancement  of  that 
country  in  wealth  and  industry,  in  enlightenment 
and  social  improvement,  may  henceforth  entitle  its 
spirited  and  generous  people  to  the  enjoyment  of  the 
same  confidence  as  their  English  brethren. 

But  perhaps  the  greatest  anomaly  in  our  laws, — 
Impress-  ^^®  most  signal  exception  to  personal  free- 
^^^^'  dom, — is  to  be  found  in  the   custom  of 

impressment,  for  the  land  and  sea  service.  There  is 
nothing  incompatible  with  freedom,  in  a  conscription 
or  forced  levy  of  men,  for  the  defence  of  the  country. 
It  may  be  submitted  to,  in  the  freest  republic,  like 
the  payment  of  taxes.  The  services  of  every  subject 
may  be  required,  in  such  form  as  the  state  deter- 
mines. But  impressment  is  the  arbitrary  and  capri- 
cious seizure  of  individuals,  from  among  the  general 
body  of  citizens.  It  differs  from  conscription,  as  a 
particular  confiscation  differs  from  a  general  tax. 

The  impressment  of  soldiers  for  the  wars  was  for- 
impress-       mcrlv  cxerciscd  as  part  of  the  royal  prero- 

mentfor  "^  ^  J        r 

the  army.  gative  I  but  amoug  the  services  rendered  to 
liberty  by  the  Long  Parliament,  in  its  earlier  coun- 
cils, this  custom  was  condemned,  '  except  in  case  of 
necessity  of  the  sudden  coming  in  of  strange  enemies 
into  the  kingdom,  or  except '  in  the  case  of  persons 
'  otherwise  bound  by  the  tenure  of  their  lands  or 
possessions.'^  The  prerogative  was  discontinued: 
but  during  the  exigencies  of  war,  the  temptation  of 
'  Hans  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  c.  696-755.  =  16  Charles  I.  c.  28. 


Impressment.  21 

impressment  was  too  strong  to  be  resisted  by  Parlia- 
ment. The  class  on  whom  it  fell,  however,  found 
little  sympathy  from  society.  They  were  rogues 
and  vagabonds,  who  were  held  to  be  better  employed 
in  defence  of  their  country,  than  in  plunder  and 
mendicancy.^  During  the  American  war,  impress- 
ment was  permitted  in  the  case  of  all  idle  and  dis- 
orderly persons,  not  following  any  lawful  trade,  or 
having  some  substance  sufficient  for  their  mainten- 
ance.2  Such  men  were  seized  upon,  without  com- 
punction, and  hurried  to  the  war.  It  was  a  danger- 
ous license,  repugnant  to  the  free  spirit  of  our  laws  ; 
and,  in  later  times,  the  state  has  trusted  to  bounties 
and  the  recruiting  sergeant,  and  not  to  impressment, 
— for  strengthening  its  land  forces. 

But  for  manning  the  navy  in  time  of  war,  the 
impressment  of  seamen  has  been  recognised  impress- 

^  °  ment  for 

by  the  common  law,  and  by  many  statutes.^  the  navy. 
The  hardships  and  cruelties  of  the  system  were 
notorious.'^  No  violation  of  natural  liberty  could  be 
more  gross.  Free  men  were  forced  into  a  painful 
and  dangerous  service,  not  only  against  their  will, 
but  often  by  fraud  and  violence.  Entrapped  in 
taverns,  or  torn  from  their  homes  by  armed  press- 
gangs,  in  the  dead  of  night,  they  were  hurried  on 
board  ship,  to  die  of  wounds  or  pestilence.  Im- 
pressment was  restricted  by  law  to   seamen,  who 

'  Pari.  Hist.,  xv.  647. 

2  19  Geo.  in.  c.  10  ;  Pari.  Hist.,  xx.  114. 

s  Sir  M.  Foster's  Eep.,  154;  Stat.  2  Rich.  II.  c.  4  ;  2  &  3  Phil, 
and  Mary,  c.  16,  &c. ;  5  &■  6  Will.  IV.  c.  24  ;  Barrington  on  the  Sta- 
tutes, 334 ;  Blackstone,  i.  425  (Kerr) ;  Stephen's  Comm.,  ii.  576 ; 
Pari.  Hist.,  vi.  518. 

*  Pari.  Hist.,  xv.  544,  xix.  81,  &Cc 


2  2  Liberty  of  the  StcbjecL 

being  most  needed  for  the  fleet,  chiefly  sufiered  from 
the  violence  of  the  press-gangs.  They  were  taken 
on  the  coast,  or  seized  on  board  merchant-ships,  like 
criminals :  ships  at  sea  were  rifled  of  their  crews,  and 
left  without  sufiScient  hands  to  take  them  safely  into 
port.  Nay,  we  even  find  soldiers  employed  to  assist 
the  press-gangs :  villages  invested  by  a  regular 
force ;  sentries  standing  with  fixed  bayonets ;  and 
churches  surrounded,  during  divine  service,  to  seize 
seamen  for  the  fleet.* 

The  lawless  press-gangs  were  no  respecters  of 
Press-gangs,  persous.  In  vaiu  did  apprentices  and 
landsmen  claim  exemption.  They  were  skulking 
sailors  in  disguise,  or  would  make  good  seamen,  at 
the  first  scent  of  salt-water  ;  and  were  carried  off  to 
the  sea-ports.  Press-gangs  were  the  terror  of  citizens 
and  apprentices  in  London,  of  labourers  in  villages, 
and.  of  artisans  in  the  remotest  inland  towns.  Their 
approach  was  dreaded  like  the  invasion  of  a  foreign 
enemy.  To  escape  their  swoop,  men  forsook  their 
trades  and  families  and  fled, — or  armed  themselves 
for  resistance.  Their  deeds  have  been  recounted  in 
history,  in  fiction,  and  in  song.  Outrages  were  of 
course  deplored:  but  the  navy  was  the  pride  of 
England,  and  everyone  agreed  that  it  must  be 
recruited.  In  vain  were  other  means  suggested  for 
manning  the  fleet, — higher  wages,  limited  service, 
and  increased  pensions.  Such  schemes  were  doubt- 
ful expedients :  the  navy  could  not  be  hazarded : 
press-gangs  must  still  go  forth  and  execute  their 

»  Dec.  2nd,  1755,  Pari.  Hist.,  xv.  549. 


Impressinent.  23 

rough  commission,  or  England  would  be  lost.     And 
so  impressment  prospered.^ 

So  constant  were  the  draughts  of  seamen  for  the 
American  war,  that  in  1779  the  customary  Eetrospec- 
exemptions  from  impressment  were  with-  1779. 
drawn.  Men  following  callings  under  the  protection 
of  various  statutes  were  suddenly  kidnapped,  by  the 
authority  of  Parliament,  and  sent  to  the  fleet ;  and 
this  invasion  of  their  rights  was  efifected  in  the 
ruffianly  spirit  of  the  press-gang.  A  bill  proposed 
late  at  night,  in  a  thin  house,  and  without  notice, — 
avowedly  in  order  to  surprise  its  victims, — was  made 
retrospective  in  its  operation.  Even  before  it  was 
proposed  to  Parliament,  orders  had  been  given  for 
a  vigorous  impressment,  without  any  regard  to  the 
existing  law.  Every  illegal  act  was  to  be  made  law- 
ful ;  and  men  who  had  been  seized  in  violation  of 
statutes,  were  deprived  of  the  protection  of  a  writ 
of  habeas  corpus.'^  Early  in  the  next  exhausting 
war,  the  state,  unable  to  spare  its  rogues  Enjigtment 
and  vagabonds  for  the  army,  allowed  them  '^ct,i795. 
to  be  impressed,  with  smugglers  and  others  of 
doubtful  means  and  industry,  for  the  service  of 
the  fleet.  The  select  body  of  electors  were  exempt: 
but  all  other  men  out  of  work  were  lawful  prize. 


'  See  debate  on  Mr.  Luttrell's  motion,  March  11th,  1777;  Pari, 
Hist.,  xix.  81.  On  the  22nd  Nov.,  1770,  Lord  Chatham  said:  'I 
am  myself  clearly  convinced,  and  I  believe  every  man  who  knows 
anything  of  the  English  navy  will  acknowledge,  that,  without  im- 
pressing, it  is  impossible  to  equip  a  respectable  fleet  within  the 
time  in  which  such  armaments  are  usually  wanted.' — Pari.  Hist.,  xvi. 
1101. 

-  Jixne  23rd,  1779.  Speech  of  the  attorney-general  Wedderburn  ; 
Pari.  Hist.,  xx.  962  ;  29  Geo.  III.  c.  75. 


24  Liberty  of  the  Subject. 

Their  service  was  without  limit ;  they  might  be 
slaves  for  life.* 

Throughout  the  war,  these  sacrifices  of  liberty 
Enlistment  wero  cxacted  for  the  public  safety.  But 
peace.  whou  the  land  was  once  more  blessed  with 

peace,  it  was  asked  if  they  would  be  endured  again. 
The  evils  of  impressment  were  repeatedly  discussed 
in  Parliament,  and  schemes  of  voluntary  enlist- 
ment proposed  by  Mr.  Hume^  and  others.^  Minis- 
ters and  Parliament  were  no  less  alive  to  the 
dangerous  principles  on  which  recruiting  for  the 
navy  had  hitherto  been  conducted ;  and  devised 
new  expedients  more  consistent  with  the  national 
defences  of  a  free  country.  Higher  wages,  larger 
bounties,  shorter  periods  of  service,  and  a  reserve 
volunteer  force,* — such  have  been  the  means  by 
which  the  navy  has  been  strengthened  and  popular- 
ised. During  the  Kussian  war  great  fleets  were 
manned  for  the  Baltic  and  the  Mediterranean  by 
volunteers.  Impressment, — not  yet  formally  re- 
nounced by  law, — has  been  condemned  by  the 
general  sentiment  of  the  country;^  and  we  may 
hope  that  modern  statesmanship  has,  at  length,  pro- 
vided for  the  efficiency  of  the  fleet,  by  measures 
consistent  with  the  liberty  of  the  subject. 

»  35  Geo.  in.  c.  34. 

5  June  10th,  1824;  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xi.  1171;  June  9th, 
1825  ;  lUd.,  xiii.  1097. 

»  Mr.  Buckingham,  Aug.  15th,  1833 ;  March  4th,  1834 ;  Hans. 
Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xx.  691;  xxi.  1061  ;  Earl  of  Durham,  March  3rd, 
1834  ;  lUd.,  xxi.  992  ;  Capt.  Harris,  May  23rd,  1850 ;  Ihxd.,  cxi.  279. 

*  5  &  6  Will.  IV.  c.  24  ;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxvi.  1120;  xcii. 
10,  729 ;  16  &  17  Vict;,  c.  69  ;  17  and  18  Vict.  c.  18. 

*  The  able  commission  on  manning  the  navy,  in  1859,  reported 
•the  evidence  of  the  "witnesses,  with  scarcely  an  exception,  shows 
that  the  system  of  naval  impressment,  as  practised  in  former  wars, 
could  not  now  be  successfully  enforced.' — p.  xi. 


Crown  Debtors.  25 

Tlie  personal  liberty  of  British  subjects  has 
further  suffered  from  rigours  and  abuses  of  ^^^^^^^ 
the  law.  The  supervision  necessary  for  the  ^^^• 
collection  of  taxes, — and  especially  of  the  excise, 
— ^has  been  frequently  observed  upon,  as  a  restraint 
upon  the  natui-al  freedom  of  the  subject.  The  visits 
of  revenue  officers,  throughout  the  processes  of 
manufacture, — the  summary  procedure  by  which 
penalties  are  enforced, — and  the  encouragement 
given  to  informers,  have  been  among  the  most  popu- 
lar arguments  against  duties  of  excise.^  The  repeal 
of  many  of  these  duties,  under  an  improved  fiscal 
policy,  has  contributed  as  well  to  the  liberties  of  the 
people,  as  to  their  material  welfare. 

But  restraints  and  vexations  were  not  the  worst 
incident  of  the  revenue  laws.  An  onerous  ^.^.^^ 
and  complicated  system  of  taxation  in-  debtors. 
volved  numerous  breaches  of  the  law.  Many  were 
punished  with  fines,  which,  if  not  paid,  were  fol- 
lowed by  imprisonment.  It  was  right  that  the  law 
should  be  vindicated:  but  while  other  offences 
escaped  with  limited  terms  of  imprisonment,  the 
luckless  debtors  of  the  crown,  if  too  poor  to  pay 
their  fees  and  costs,  might  suffer  imprisonment  for 
life.^  Even  when  the  legislature  at  length  took 
pity  upon  other  debtors,  this  class  of  prisoners  were 
excepted  from  its  merciful  care.^  But  they  have 
since  shared  in  the  milder  policy  of  our  laws ;  and 

•  Adam  Smith,  speaking  of  *  the  frequent  visits  and  odious  ex- 
amination of  the  tax-gatherers,'  says  :  '  Dealers  have  no  respite  from 
the  continual  visits  and  examination  of  the  excise  eflficers.' — Book  v. 
c.  2. — Blackstone  says:  'The  rigour,  and  arbitrary  proceedings  of 
excise  laws,  seem  hardly  compatible  with  the  temper  of  a  free  nation.' 
^Comm.,  i.  308  (Kerr's  ed.). 

2  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  viii.  808.     '  53  Geo.  III.  e.  102,  §  51. 


26  Liberty  of  the  Subject . 

Jiave  received  ample  indulgence  from  the  Treasmy 
and  the  Court  of  Exchequer.^ 

While  Parliament  continued  to  wield  its  power  of 
Vindictive  commitment  capriciously  and  vindictively, 
priSeg(i  — not  in  vindication  of  its  own  just 
ment,     '     authority,  but  for  the  punishment  of  libels, 

another 

encroach-      and  other  offences  cognisable  by  the  law, 

ment  upon 

liberty.  — it  was  scarcely  less  dangerous  than  those 
arbitrary  acts  of  prerogative  which  the  law  had 
already  condemned,  as  repugnant  to  liberty.  Its 
abuses,  however,  survived  but  for  a  few  years  after 
the  accession  of  Greorge  III.^ 

But  another  power,  of  like  character,  continued 
Commit-       to  impose — and  still  occasionally  permits 

mentsfor  ^  i 

contempt.  — the  most  cruel  restraints  upon  personal 
liberty.  A  court  of  equity  can  only  enforce  obedi- 
ence to  its  authority,  by  imprisonment.  If  obedi- 
ence be  refused,  commitment  for  contempt  must 
follow.  The  authority  of  the  court  would  otherwise 
be  defied,  and  its  jurisdiction  rendered  nugatory. 
But  out  of  this  necessary  judicial  process,  grew  up 
gross  abuses  and  oppression.  Ordinary  offences  are 
purged  by  certain  terms  of  imprisonment ;  men 
suffer  punishment  and  are  free  again.  And,  on  this 
principle,  persons  committed  for  disrespect  or  other 
contempt  to  the  court  itself,  were  released  after  a 
reasonable  time,  upon  their  apology  and  submission.* 
But  no  such  mercy  was  shown  to  those  who  failed  to 
obey  the  decrees  of  the  court,  in  any  suit.     Their 

>  7  Geo.  IV.  c.  57,  §  74;  1  &  2  Vict.  c.  110,  §  103,  104. 
-  Sujyra,  Chap.  VII. ;  and  see  Townsend's  jVlem.  of  the  House  of 
Commons,  passim. 

»  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  viii.  808. 


Commitments  for  Contempt.  27 

imprisonment  was  indefinite,  if  not  perpetual. 
Their  contempt  was  only  to  be  purged  by  obedience, 
— perhaps  wholly  beyond  their  power.  For  such 
prisoners  there  was  no  relief  but  death.  Some 
persisted  in  their  contempt  from  obstinacy,  sullen- 
ness,  and  litigious  hate :  but  many  suffered  for  no 
offence  but  ig-norance  and  poverty.  Humble  suitors, 
dragged  into  court  by  richer  litigants,  were  some- 
times too  poor  to  obtain  professional  advice,  or  even 
to  procure  copies  of  the  bills  filed  against  them. 
Lord  Eldon  himself,  to  his  honour  be  it  said,  had 
charitably  assisted  such  men  to  put  in  answers  in  his 
own  court.  ^  Others,  again,  unable  to  pay  money 
and  costs  decreed  against  them,  suffered  imprison- 
ment for  life.  This  latter  class,  however,  at  length 
became  entitled  to  relief  as  insolvent  debtors.^  But 
the  complaints  of  other  wretched  men,  to  whom  the 
law  brought  no  relief,  were  often  heard.  In  1817, 
Mr.  Bennet,  in  presenting  a  petition  from  one  of 
these  prisoners,  thus  stated  his  own  experience : 
'  Last  year,'  he  said,  '  Thomas  Williams  had  been  in 
confinement  for  thirty-one  years  by  an  order  of  the 
Court  of  Chancery.  He  had  visited  him  in  his 
wretched  house  of  bondage,  where  he  had  found  him 
sinking  under  all  the  miseries  that  can  afflict 
humanity,  and  on  the  following  day  he  died.  At 
this  time,'  he  added,  '  there  were  in  the  same  prison 
with  the  petitioner,,  a  woman  who  had  been  in  con- 
finement twenty-eight  years,  and  two  other  persons 

»  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  siv.  1178. 

2  49  Geo.  III.  c.  6;  53  Geo.  III.  c.  102,  §  47 ;  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd 
Ser.,  xiv.  1178. 


28  Liberty  of  the  Subject. 

who  had  been  there  seventeen  years.'  ^  In  the  next 
year,  Mr.  Bennet  presented  another  petition  from 
prisoners  confined  for  contempt  of  court,  complain- 
Aprii  22nd  ^^^  ^^^  nothing  had  been  done  to  relieve 
^^^^-  them,  though  they  had  followed  all  the 

instructions  of  their  lawyers.  The  petitioners  had 
witnessed  the  death  of  six  persons,  in  the  same  con- 
dition as  themselves,  one  of  whom  had  been  con- 
fined four,  another  eighteen,  and  another  thirty- 
four  years.2 

In  1820,  Lord  Althorp  presented  another  petition; 
Aug.  sist  ^^^  among  the  petitioners  was  a  woman, 
1820.  eighty-one  years  old,  who   had  been  im- 

prisoned for  thirty-one  years.'  In  the  eight  years 
preceding  1820,  twenty  prisoners  had  died  while 
under  confinement  for  contempt,  some  of  whom  had 
been  in  prison  for  upwards  of  thirty  years.'*  Even  so 
late  as  1856,  Lord  St.  Leonards  presented  a  petition, 
complaining  of  continued  hardships  upon  prisoners 
for  contempt;  and  a  statement  of  the  Lord 
Chancellor  revealed  the  difi&culty  and  painfulness  of 
such  cases.  '  A  man  who  had  been  confined  in  the 
early  days  of  Lord  Eldon's  Chancellorship  for 
refusing  to  disclose  certain  facts,  remained  in 
prison,  obstinately  declining  to  make  any  statement 
upon  the  subject,  until  his  death  a  few  months 
ago.'  ^ 

>  6th  May,  1817;  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxxvi.  158.  Mr.  Bennet 
had  made  a  statement  on  the  same  subject  in  1816  ;  Ibid.^  xxxiv. 
1099. 

2  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxxviii.  284. 

3  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  i.  693. 

*  Ihid.,  xiv.  1178;  Mr.  Hume's  Eeturn,  Pari.  Paper,  1820  (302). 

*  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  cxlii.  1570.     In  another  recent  case,  a  lad 


Arrest  on  Mesne  Process,  29 

Doubtless  the  peculiar  jurisdiction  of  courts  of 
equity  has  caused  this  extraordinary  rigour  in  the 
punishment  of  contempts :  but  justice  and  a  respect 
for  personal  liberty  alike  require  that  punishment 
should  be  meted  out  according  to  the  gravity  of  the 
offence.  The  Court  of  Queen's  Bench  upholds  its 
dignity  by  commitments  for  a  fixed  period ;  and  may 
not  the  Court  of  Chancery  be  content  with  the  like 
punishment  for  disobedience,  however  gross  and 
culpable  ? 

Every  restraint  on  public  liberty  hitherto  noticed 
has  been  permitted  either  to  the  executive  Arrest  on 

Mesne 

government,  in  the  interests  of  the  state,  Process. 
or  to  courts  of  justice,  in  the  exercise  of  a  necessary 
jurisdiction.  Indi\ddual  rights  have  been  held  sub- 
ordinate to  the  public  good ;  and  on  that  ground, 
even  questionable  practices  admitted  of  justification. 
But  the  law  further  permitted,  and  society  long 
tolerated,  the  most  grievous  and  wanton  restraints, 
imposed  by  one  subject  upon  another,  for  which  no 
such  justification  is  to  be  found.  The  law  of  debtor 
and  creditor,  until  a  comparatively  recent  period, 
was  a  scandal  to  a  civilised  country.  For  the  small- 
est claim,  any  man  was  liable  to  be  arrested,  on 
mesne  process,  before  legal  proof  of  the  debt.  He 
might  be  torn  from  his  family,  like  a  malefactor, — 
at  any  time  of  day  or  night, — and  detained  until 
bail  was  given ;  and  in  default  of  bail,  imprisoned 
until  the  debt  was  paid.  Many  of  these  arrests  were 
wanton  and  vexatious  ;  and  writs  were  issued  with  a 

was  committed  for  refusing  to  discontinue  his  addresses  to  a  ward  of 
the  court,  and  died  in  prison. 


30  Liberty  of  the  Stcbject. 

facility  and  looseness  which  placed  the  liberty  of 
every  man, — suddenly  and  without  notice, — at  the 
mercy  of  anyone  who  claimed  payment  of  a  debt. 
A  debtor,  however  honest  and  solvent,  was  liable  to 
arrest.  The  demand  might  even  be  false  and 
fraudulent :  but  the  pretended  creditor,  on  making 
oath  of  the  debt,  was  armed  with  this  terrible  pro- 
cess of  the  law.^  The  wretched  defendant  might 
lie  in  prison  for  several  months  before  his  cause  was 
heard ;  when,  even  if  the  action  was  discontinued, 
or  the  debt  disproved,  he  could  not  obtain  his  dis- 
charge without  further  proceedings,  often  too  costly 
for  a  poor  debtor,  already  deprived  of  his  livelihood 
by  imprisonment.  No  longer  even  a  debtor, — he 
could  not  shake  off  his  bonds. 

Slowly  and  with  reluctance,  did  Parliament  address 
itself  to  the  correction  of  this  monstrous  abuse.  In 
the  reign  of  Greorge  I.  arrests  on  mesne  process, 
issuing  out  of  the  superior  courts,  were  limited  to 
sums  exceeding  lOZ. :  ^  but  it  was  not  until  1779, 
tjjat  the  same  limit  was  imposed  on  the  process  of 
inferior  jurisdictions.'''  This  sum  was  afterwards 
raised  to  15^,  and  in  1827  to  20^.  In  that  year 
1,100  persons  were  confined,  in  the  prisons  of  the 
metropolis  alone,  on  mesne  process.* 

The  total  abolition  of  arrests  on  mesne  process 
was  frequently  advocated,  but  it  was  not  until  1838 
that  it  was  at  length  accomplished.     Provision  was 

'  An  executor  might  even  obtain  an  arrest  on  swearing  to  his  be- 
lief of  a  debt.     Eeport,  1792,  Com.  Journ.,  xlvii.  640. 

2  12  Geo.  I.  c.  29.  a  19  Geo.  III.  c.  70. 

*  Hans.  Deb.,  2Ld  Ser.,  xvii.  386.  The  number  in  England 
amounted  to  3,662. 


Imprisonment  for  Debt.  3 1 

made  for  securing  absconding  debtors:  but  the 
old  process  for  the  recovery  of  debt,  in  ordinary- 
cases,  which  had  wrought  so  many  acts  of  oppression, 
was  abolished.  While  this  vindictive  remedy  was 
denied,  the  creditor's  lands  were,  for  the  first  time, 
allowed  to  be  taken  in  satisfaction  of  a  debt ; '  and 
extended  facilities  were  afterwards  afforded  for  the 
recovery  of  small  claims,  by  the  establishment  of 
county  courts.* 

The  law  of  arrest  was  reckless  of  liberty  :  the  law 
of  execution  for  debt  was  one  of  savage  imprison- 

^       mentfor 

barbarity.  A  creditor  is  entitled  to  every  debt. 
protection  and  remedy,  which  the  law  can  reasonably 
give.  All  the  debtor's  property  should  be  his ; 
and  frauds  by  which  he  has  been  wronged  should  be 
punished  as  criminal.  But  the  remedies  of  English 
law  against  the  property  of  a  debtor  were  strangely 
inadequate, — its  main  security  being  the  body  of 
the  debtor.  This  became  the  property  of  the 
creditor,  until  the  debt  was  paid.  The  ancients 
allowed  a  creditor  to  seize  his  debtor,  and  hold  him 
in  slavery.  It  was  a  cruel  practice,  condemned  by 
the  most  enlightened  lawgivers :  ^  but  it  was  more 
rational  and  humane  than  the  law  of  England.  By 
servitude  a  man  might  work  out  his  debt :  by  im- 
prisonment, restitution  was  made  impossible,  A 
man  was  torn   from   his   trade   and   industry,  and 


5  1  &  2  Vict.  c.  110.  2  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  95. 

'  Solon  renounced  it,  finding  examples  amongt  the  Egyptians. — 
PhdarcKs  Life  of  Solon ;  Diod.  Sic,,  lib.  i.  part  2,  ch.  3 ;  Montesquieu, 
livr.  xii.  ch.  21.  It  was  abolished  in  Eome,  a.d.  428,  when  the  true 
principle  was  thus  defined — *  Bona  debitoris,  non  corpus  obnoxium 
esset.' — Livy^  lib.  8;  Montesquieu,  livr.  xx.  ch.  14. 


32  Liberty  of  the  Subject. 

buried  in  a  dungeon :  tlie  debtor  perished,  but  the 
creditor  was  unpaid.  The  penalty  of  an  unpaid 
debt,  however  small,  was  imprisonment  for  life.  A 
trader  within  the  operation  of  the  bankrupt  laws 
might  obtain  his  discharge,  on  giving  up  all  his 
property  :  but  for  an  insolvent  debtor  there  was  no 
possibility  of  relief,  but  charity  or  the  rare  indulg- 
ence of  his  creditor.  His  body  being  the  property 
of  his  creditor,  the  law  could  not  interfere.  He 
might  become  insane,  or  dangerously  sick  :  but  the 
court  was  imable  to  give  him  liberty.  We  read 
with  horror  of  a  woman  dying  in  the  Devon  County 
Graol,  after  an  imprisonment  of  forty-five  years,  for  a 
debt  of  19^1 

While  the  law  thus  trifled  with  the  liberty  of 
Debtors'  debtors,  it  took  no  thought  of  their 
prisons.  wretched  fate,  after  the  prison-door  had 
closed  upon  them.  The  traditions  of  the  debtors' 
prison  are  but  too  familiar  to  us  all.  The  horrors  of 
the  Fleet  and  the  Marshalsea  were  laid  bare  in  1729. 
The  poor  debtors  were  found  crowded  together  on 
the  '  common  side,' — covered  with  filth  and  vermin, 
and  suffered  to  die,  without  pity,  of  hunger  and 
gaol  fever.  Nor  did  they  suffer  from  neglect  alone. 
They  had  committed  no  crime:  yet  were  they  at 
the  mercy  of  brutal  gaolers,  who  loaded  them  with 
irons,  and  racked  them  with  tortures.^  No  attempt 
was  made  to  distinguish  the  fraudulent  from  the 
unfortunate  debtor.  The  rictf  rogue, — able,  but  un- 
willing to  pay  his  debts. — might  riot  in  luxury  and 

*  Eep.  of  1792,  Com.  Journ.,  xlvii.  647. 
2  Com.  Journ.,  xxi.  274,  376,  513. 


Impriso7iment  for  Debt.  33 

debauchery,  while  his  poor,  unlucky  fellow-prisoner 
was  left  to  starve  and  rot  on  the  '  common  side/  ^ 

The  worst  iniquities  of  prison  life  were  abated  by 
the  active  benevolence  of  John  Howard ;  and  poor 
debtors  found  some  protection,  in  common  with 
felons,  from  the  brutality  of  gaolers.  But  other- 
wise their  sufferings  were  without  mitigation.  The 
law  had  made  no  provision  for  supplying  indigent 
prisoners  with  necessary  food,  bed-clothes,  or  other 
covering;^  and  it  was  proved,  in  1792,  that  many 
died  of  actual  want,  being  without  the  commonest 
necessaries  of  life.^ 

The  first  systematic  relief  was  given  to  insolvent 
debtors,  by  the  benevolence  of  the  Thatched  The 
House  Society,  m  1772.     In  twenty  years  house 
this  noble  body  released  from  prison  12,590  1772. 
honest   and   unfortunate   debtors;    and   so   trifling 
were  the  debts  for  which  these  prisoners  had  suf- 
fered confinement,  that  their  freedom  was  obtained 
at  an  expense  of  forty-five  shillings  a  head.     Many 
were  discharged  merely  on  payment  of  the  gaol  fees, 
for  which  alone  they  were  detained  in  prison :  others 
on  payment  of  costs,  the  original  debts  having  long 
since  been  discharged.'* 

*  Eep.  1792,  Com.  Joum.,  xlvii.  652 ;  Vicar  of  Wakefield,  ch. 
xsv.-xxviii. 

-  Keport,  1792,  Com.  Joum.,  xlvii.  641.  The  only  exception  was 
under  the  act  32  Geo.  11.  c.  28,  of  very  partial  operation,  tmder  which 
the  detaining  creditor  was  forced  to  allow  the  debtor  4c?.  a  day ;  and 
such  was  the  cold  cruelty  of  creditors,  that  many  a  debtor  confined 
for  sums  under  20s.,  was  detained  at  their  expense,  which  soon  ex- 
ceeded the  amount  of  the  debt. — Ibid.,  644,  650.  This  allowance 
was  raised  to  35.  ^d.  a  week  by  37  Geo.  III.  c.  85. 

3  Ihid.,  651. 

*  Eeport,  1792,  Com.  Joum.,  xlvii.  648. 

VOL.  III.  D 


34  Liberty  of  the  Subject, 

The  monstrous  evils  and  abuses  of  imprisonment 
Exposure  ^^^  debt,  and  the  sufferings  of  prisoners, 
179?^?'  ^^^^  ftilly  exposed,  in  an  able  report  to 
^^^^*  the  House  of  Commons  drawn  by  Mr.  Grrey 

in  1792.^  But  for  several  years,  these  evils  received 
little  correction.  In  1815  the  prisons  were  still 
over-crowded,  and  their  wretched  inmates  left  with- 
out allowance  of  food,  fuel,  bedding,  or  medical 
attendance.  Complaints  were  still  heard  of  their 
perishing  of  cold  and  hunger.^ 

Special  acts  had  been  passed,  from  time  to  time. 
Insolvent  siuce  the  reign  of  Anne,^  for  the  relief  of 
Act,  1813.  insolvents  :  but  they  were  of  temporary 
and  partial  operation.  Overcrowded  prisons  had 
been  sometimes  thinned :  but  the  rigours  and  abuses 
of  the  laws  affecting  debtors  were  unchanged ;  and 
thousands  of  insolvents  still  languished  in  prison. 
In  1760,  a  remedial  measure  of  more  general 
operation  was  passed:  but  was  soon  afterwards 
repealed.'*  Provision  was  also  made  for  the  re- 
lease of  poor  debtors  in  certain  cases :  ^  but  it  was 
not  until  1813  that  insolvents  were  placed  under 
the  jurisdiction  of  a  court,  and  entitled  to  seek 
their  discharge  on  rendering  a  true  account  of  all 
their  debts  and  property.^  A  distinction  was  at 
length  recognised  between  poverty  and  crime.     This 

*  Com.  Journ.,  xlvii.  640. 

2  7th  March,  1815,  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxx.  39  ;  Commons'  Ee- 
port  on  King's  Bench,  Fleet,  and  Marshalsea  Prisons,  1815.  The 
King's  Bench,  calculated  to  hold  220  prisoners,  had  600 ;  the  Fleet, 
estimated  to  hold  200,  had  769. 

'  1  Anne,  st.  i.  c.  25. 

*  1  Geo.  III.  c.  17 ;  Adolph.  Hist.,  i.  17,  n. 
«  32  Geo.  II.  c.  28  ;  33  Geo.  III.  c.  6. 

"  53  Geo.  III.  c.  102 ;  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxvi.  301,  &c. 


Imprisonment  for  Debt.  35 

great  remedial  law  restored  liberty  to  crowds  of 
wretched  debtors.  In  the  next  thirteen  years  up- 
wards of  50,000  were  set  free.^  Thirty  ^^^^ 
years  later,  its  beneficent  principles  were  STeUrfto 
fiu'ther  extended,  when  debtors  were  not  ^^^*''^- 
only  released  from  confinement,  but  able  to  claim 
protection  to  their  liberty,  on  giving  up  all  their 
goods.2  And  at  length,  in  1861,  the  law  attained 
its  fullest  development,  in  the  liberal  measui*e  of 
Sir  K.  Bethell :  when  fraudulent  debt  was  dealt  with 
as  a  crime,  and  imprisonment  of  common  debtors 
was  repudiated.^  Nor  did  the  enlightened  charity 
of  the  legislature  rest  here.  Debtors  already  in 
confinement  were  not  left  to  seek  their  liberation : 
but  were  set  free  by  the  officers  of  the  Court  of 
Bankruptcy,'*  Some  had  grown  familiar  with  their 
prison  walls,  and  having  lost  all  fellowship  with  the 
outer  world,  clung  to  their  miserable  cells,  as  to  a 
home.'*^  They  were  led  forth  gently,  and  restored 
to  a  life  that  had  become  strange  to  them;  and 
their  untenanted  dungeons  were  condemned  to  de- 
struction. 

The  free  soil  of  England  has,  for  ages,  been  re- 
lieved from  the  reproach  of  slavery.     The  The  negro 
ancient    condition    of    villenage    expired  ^^^'  ^^^^" 
about  the  commencement  of  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury ;  ^  and  no  other  form  of  slavery  was  recognised 

1  Mr.  Hume's  Return,  1827  (430). 

2  Protection  Acts,  5  &  6  Vict.  c.  96  ;  7  &  8  Vict.  c.  96. 
"  Bankruptcy  Act,  24  &  25  Vict.  c.  134,  §  221. 

*  Ibid.,  §  98-105. 

'  In  January,  1862,  John  Miller  -was  removed  from  the  Queen's 
Bench  Prison,  having  been  there  since  1814. — Times,  Jan.  23rd,  1862. 
"  Noy,  27.     Hargrave's  Argument  in  Ifegro  Case,  St.  Tr.,  xx.  40 ; 
i>2 


36  Liberty  of  the  Subject. 

by  our  laws.  In  the  colonies,  however,  it  was 
legalised  by  statute ;  ^  and  it  was  long  before  the 
rights  of  a  colonial  slave,  in  the  mother  country, 
were  ascertained,  Lord  Holt,  indeed,  had  pro- 
nounced an  opinion  that,  '  as  soon  as  a  negro  comes 
into  England,  he  becomes  free ; '  and  Mr.  Justice 
Powell  had  affirmed  that  '  the  law  takes  no  notice 
of  a  negro.' ^  But  these  just  opinions  were  not  con- 
firmed by  express  adjudication  imtil  the  celebrated 
case  of  James  Sommersett  in  1771.  This  negro 
having  been  brought  to  England  by  his  owner, 
Mr.  Stewart,  left  that  gentleman's  service,  and  re- 
fused to  return  to  it.  Mr.  Stewart  had  him  seized 
and  placed  in  irons,  on  board  a  ship  then  lying  in 
the  Thames,  and  about  to  sail  for  Jamaica, — where 
he  intended  to  sell  his  mutinous  slave.  But  while 
the  negro  was  still  lying  on  board,  he  was  brought 
before  the  Court  of  King's  Bench  by  habeas  corpus. 
The  question  was  now  fully  discussed,  more  particu- 
larly in  a  most  learned  and  able  argument  by  Mr. 
Hargrave ;  and  at  length,  in  June  1772,  Lord  Mans- 
field pronounced  the  opinion  of  the  Court,  that 
slavery  in  England  was  illegal,  and  that  the  negro 
must  be  set  free,^ 

It  was  a  righteous  judgment :  but  scarcely  worthy 
of  the  extravagant  commendation  bestowed  upon 
it,  at  that  time  and  since.  This  boasted  law,  as 
declared  by  Lord   Mansfield,  was   already    recog- 

Smith's  Commonwealth,  book  2,  ch.  10 ;  Barrington  on  the  Statutes, 
2nd  ed.  p.  232. 

»  10  Will.  III.  c.  26 ;  5  Geo.  II.  c.  7 ;  32  Geo.  II.  c.  31. 

2  Smith  V.  Browne  and  Cowper,  2  Salk.  666. 

'  Case  of  James  Sommersett,  St.  Tr.,  xx.  1;  Lofft's  Kep,,  1. 


Last  Relics  of  Slavery.  '37 

nised  in  France,  Holland,  and  some  other  European 
countries;  and  as  yet  England  liad  shown  no 
symptoms  of  compassion  for  the  negro  beyond  her 
own  shores.' 

In  Scotland,  negro  slaves  continued  to  be  sold  as 
chattels,  until  late  in  the  last  century.^  It  j^egroes  in 
was  not  until  1756,  that  the  lawfulness  of  ^*^<^- 
negro  slavery  was  questioned.  In  that  year,  how- 
ever, a  negro  who  had  been  brought  to  Scotland, 
claimed  his  liberty  of  his  master,  Robert  Sheddan, 
who  had  put  him  on  board  ship  to  return  to  Vir- 
ginia. But  before  his  claim  could  be  decided,  the 
poor  negro  died.^  But  for  this  sad  incident,  a 
Scotch  court  would  first  have  had  the  credit  of  set- 
ting the  negTO  free  on  British  soil.  Four  years 
after  the  case  of  Sommersett,  the  law  of  Scotland 
was  settled.  Mr.  Wedderbum  had  brought  with 
him  to  Scotland,  as  his  personal  servant,  a  negro 
named  Knight,  who  continued  several  years  in  his 
service,  and  married  in  that  country.  But,  at  length, 
he  claimed  his  freedom.  The  sheriff  being  appealed 
to,  held  '  that  the  state  of  slavery  is  not  recognised  by 
the  laws  of  this  kingdom.'  The  case  being  brought 
before  the  Court  of  Session,  it  was  adjudged  that  the 
master  had  no  right  to  the  negro's  service,  nor  to 
send  him  out  of  the  country  without  his  consent.'* 

*  Hargrave's  Argument,  St.  Tr,,  xx.  62. 

2  Chambers'  Domestic  Annals  of  Scotland,  iii.  453.  On  the  2n(i 
May,  1722,  an  advertisement  appeared  in  the  Edinburgh  Evening 
Courant,  announcing  that  a  stolen  negro  had  been  found,  who 
would  be  sold  to  pay  expenses,  unless  claimed  within  two  weeks. — 
Ibid. 

'  See  Dictionary  of  Decisions,  tit.  Slave,  iii.  14545. 

*  Ibid.,  p.  14549. 


38  Liberty  of  the  Subject. 

The  negro  in  Scotland  was  now  assured  of  free- 
Colliers  and    dom :  but,  startling  as  it  may  sound,  the 

SRxuGrSy  in, 

Scotland.  slavery  of  native  Scotchmen  continued  to 
be  recognised,  in  that  country,  to  the  very  end  of 
last  century.  The  colliers  and  salters  were  un- 
questionably slaves.  They  were  bound  to  continue 
their  service  during  their  lives,  were  fixed  to  their 
places  of  employment,  and  sold  with  the  works  to 
which  they  belonged.  So  completely  did  the  law  of 
Scotland  regard  them  as  a  distinct  class,  not  en- 
titled to  the  same  liberties  as  their  fellow-subjects, 
that  they  were  excepted  from  the  Scotch  Habeas 
Corpus  Act  of  1701.  Nor  had  their  slavery  the 
excuse  of  being  a  remnant  of  the  ancient  feudal 
state  of  villenage,  which  had  expired  before  coal- 
mines were  yet  worked  in  Scotland.  But  being 
paid  high  wages,  and  having  peculiar  skill,  their 
employers  had  originally  contrived  to  bind  them  to 
serve  for  a  term  of  years,  or  for  life  ;  and  such  ser- 
vice at  length  became  a  recognised  custom.^  In 
1775  their  condition  attracted  the  notice  of  the 
legislature,  and  an  act  was  passed  for  their  relief.^ 
Its  preamble  stated  that  '  many  colliers  and  salters 
are  in  a  state  of  slavery  and  bondage ; '  and  that 
their  emancipation  '  would  remove  the  reproach  of 
allowing  such  a  state  of  servitude  to  exist  in  a  free 
country.'  But  so  deeply  rooted  was  this  hateful 
custom,  that  Parliament  did  not  venture  to  con- 
demn it  as  illegal.     It  was  provided  that  colliers 

'  Forb.  Inst.,  part  1,  b.  2,  t.  3  ;  Macdonal.  Inst.,  i.  63 ;  Cockburu's 
Mem.,  76. 

2  15  Geo.  III.  c.  28. 


spies  and  Informers.  39 

and  salters  commencing  work  after  the  1st  of  July, 
1775,  should  not  become  slaves  ;  and  that  those 
already  in  a  state  of  slavery  might  obtain  their 
freedom  in  seven  years,  if  under  twenty-one  years 
of  age  ;  in  ten  years,  if  under  thirty-five.  To  avail 
themselves  of  this  enfranchisement,  however,  they 
were  obliged  to  obtain  a  decree  of  the  Sheriff's 
Court ;  and  these  poor  ignorant  slaves,  generally  in 
debt  to  their  masters,  were  rarely  in  a  condition  to 
press  their  claims  to  freedom.  Hence  the  act  was 
practically  inoperative.  But  at  length,  in  1799, 
their  freedom  was  absolutely  established  by  law.^ 

The  last  vestige  of  slavery  was  now  effaced  from 
the  soil  of  Britain :  but  not  until  the  land  siave  trade 

.         and  colonial 

had  been  resounding  for  years  with  outcries  slavery. 
against  the  African  slave  trade.  Seven  years  later 
that  odious  traffic  was  condemned ;  and  at  length 
colonial  slavery  itself, — so  long  encouraged  and 
protected  by  the  legislature, — gave  way  before  the 
enlightened  philanthropy  of  another  generation. 

Next  in  importance  to  personal  freedom  is  im- 
munity from  suspicions,  and  jealous  obser-  gpiegg^a 
vation.  Men  may  be  without  restraints  i"fo™ers. 
upon  their  liberty :  they  may  pass  to  and  fro  at 
pleasure :  but  if  their  steps  are  tracked  by  spies  and 
informers,  their  words  noted  down  for  crimination, 
their  associates  watched  as  conspirators, — who  shall 
say  that  they  are  free  ?  Nothing  is  more  revolting 
to  Englishmen  than  the  espionage  which  forms  part 
of  the  administrative  system  of  continental  despot- 
isms.     It  haunts  men  like  an  evil  genius,  chills 

>  39  Geo.  III.  c.  56. 


40  Liberty  of  the  Subject. 

their  gaiety,  restrains  their  wit,  casts  a  shadow  over 
their  friendships,  and  blights  their  domestic  hearth. 
The  freedom  of  a  coiintry  may  be  measured  by  its 
immunity  from  this  baleful  agency.^  Eulers  who 
distrust  their  own  people,  must  govern  in  a  spirit  of 
absolutism;  and  suspected  subjects  will  be  ever 
sensible  of  their  bondage. 

Our  own  countrymen  have  been  comparatively 
Spies  in  exempt  from  this  hateful  interference  with 
^'^^'  their  moral  freedom.     Yet  we  find  many 

traces  of  a  system  repugnant  to  the  liberal  policy  of 
our  laws.  In  1764,  we  see  spies  following  Wilkes 
everywhere,  dogging  his  steps  like  shadows,  and  re- 
porting every  movement  of  himself  and  his  friends 
to  the  secretaries  of  state.  Nothing  was  too  insignifi- 
cant for  the  curiosity  of  these  exalted  magistrates. 
Every  visit  he  paid  or  received  throughout  the  day 
was  noted :  the  persons  he  chanced  to  encounter  in 
the  streets  were  not  overlooked:  it  was  known 
where  he  dined,  or  went  to  church,  and  at  what 
hour  he  returned  home  at  night.^ 

In  the  state  trials  of  1794,  we  discover  spies  and 
In  1794.  informers  in  the  witness-box,  who  had  been 
active  members  of  political  societies,  sharing  their 
councils,  and  encouraging,  if  not  prompting,  their 
criminal  extravagance.^  And  throughout  that  period 

*  Montesquieu  speaks  of  informers  as  '  im  genre  d'hommes  funeste.' 
— Liv.  vi.  ch.  8.  And  of  spies,  he  says :  '  Faut-il  des  espions  dans 
la  monarchie  ?  ce  n'est  pas  la  pratique  ordinaire  des  bons  princes.' — 
Liv.  xii.  eh.  23.  And  again:  'L'espionage  seroit  peut-etre  toler- 
able s'il  pouvoit  etre  exerc6  par  d'honnetes  gens :  mais  I'infamie 
necessaire  de  la  personne  pent  faire  juger  de  I'infamie  de  la  chose.' 

*  Grenville  Papers,  ii.  155.  ^  gt  Tr.,  xxiv.  722,  800,  806. 


spies  and  Informers.  41 

of  dread  and  suspicion,  society  was  everywhere  in- 
fested with  espionage.^ 

Again,  in  1817,  government  spies  were  deeply 
compromised  in  the  turbulence  and  sedi-  gpj^g  j^ 
tion  of  that  period.  Castle,  a  spy  of  infa-  •^^^^* 
mous  character,  having  uttered  the  most  seditious 
language,  and  incited  the  people  to  arm,  proved  in 
the  witness-box  the  very  crimes  he  had  himself 
prompted  and  encouraged.^  Another  spy,  named 
Oliver,  proceeded  into  the  disturbed  districts,  in  the 
character  of  a  London  delegate,  and  remained  for 
many  weeks  amongst  the  deluded  operatives,  every- 
where instigating  them  to  rise  and  arm.  He  en- 
couraged them  with  hopes  that  in  the  event  of  a 
rising,  they  would  be  assisted  by  150,000  men  in 
the  metropolis;  and  thrusting  himself  into  their 
society,  he  concealed  the  craft  of  the  spy,  under  the 
disguise  of  a  traitorous  conspirator.^  Before  he  un- 
dertook this  shameful  mission,  he  was  in  communi- 
cation with  Lord  Sidmouth;  and  throughout  his 
mischievous  progress  was  corresponding  with  the 
government  or  its  agents.  Lord  Sidmouth  himself 
is  above  the  suspicion  of  having  connived  at  the  use 
of  covert  incitements  to  treason.  The  spies  whom 
he  employed  had  sought  him  out  and  offered  their 
services  in  the  detection  of  crime  ;  and,  being  re- 
sponsible for  the  public  peace,  he  had  thought  it 

»  Su^a,  Vol.  II.  p.  304,  ct  seq. ;  Wilberforce's  Life,  iv.  369  ;  Cart- 
wright's  Life,i.  209  ;  Currie's  Life,  i.  172;  Holcroft's  Mem.,  ii.  190  ; 
Stephens'  Life  of  Home  Tooke,  ii.  118. 

2  St.  Tr.,  xxxii.  214,  284,  et  seq.;  Earl  Grey,  June  16th,  1817; 
Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser,,  xxxvi.  102. 

3  Bamford's  Life  of  a  Radical,  i.  77,  158;  Mr.  Ponsonby's  State- 
ment, June  23rd,  1817  ;  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxxvi.  1114. 


42  Liberty  of  the  Sitbjcct. 

necessary  to  secure  information  of  the  intended 
movements  of  dangerous  bodies  of  men.^  But 
Oliver's  activity  was  so  conspicuous  as  seriously  to 
compromise  the  government.  Immediately  after 
the  outbreak  in  Derbyshire,  his  conduct  was  indig- 
nantly reprobated  in  both  Houses ;  ^  and  after  the 
outrages,  in  which  he  had  been  an  accomplice,  had 
been  judicially  investigated,  his  proceedings  received 
a  still  more  merciless  exposure  in  Parliament.^ 
There  is  little  doubt  that  Oliver  did  more  to  dis- 
turb the  public  peace  by  his  malign  influence,  than 
to  protect  it,  by  timely  information  to  the  govern- 
ment. The  agent  was  mischievous,  and  his  prin- 
cipals could  not  wholly  escape  the  blame  of  his 
misdeeds.  Their  base  instrument,  in  his  coarse 
zeal  for  his  employers,  brought  discredit  upon  the 
means  they  had  taken,  in  good  faith,  for  preventing 
disorders.  To  the  severity  of  repressive  measures, 
and  a  rigorous  administration  of  the  law,  was  added 
the  reproach  of  a  secret  alliance  between  the  execu- 
tive and  a  wretch  who  had  at  once  tempted  an4 
betrayed  his  unhappy  victims. 

The  relations  between  the  government  and  its 
Relations  of  informers  are  of  extreme  delicacy.  Not  to 
SitMnfor^^  profit  by  timely  information  were  a  crime : 
™^"*  but  to  retain  in  government  pay,  and  to 

reward  spies  and  informers,  who  consort  with  con- 


»  Lord  Sidmouth's  Life,  iii.  185. 

2  16th  and  23rd  June,  1817 ;  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxxvi.  1016, 
1111. 

3  St.  Tr.,  xxxii.  755,  et  seq. ;  11th  Feb.,  1818  ;  Hans.  Deb.,  xxxvii. 
3."8 ;  Speeches  of  Lord  Milton,  Mr.  Bennet;  Feb.  19th,  and  March 
6th :  (Lords),  Ibid.,  622,  802. 


spies  and  Informers,  43 

spirators  as  their  sworn  accomplices,  and  encourage 
while  thsy  betray  them  in  their  crimes,  is  a  prac- 
tice for  which  no  plea  can  be  offered.  No  govern- 
ment, indeed,  can  be  supposed  to  have  expressly 
instructed  its  spies  to  instigate  the  perpetration  of 
crime :  but  to  be  unsuspected,  every  spy  must  be 
zealous  in  the  cause  which  he  pretends  to  have  es- 
poused ;  and  his  zeal  in  a  criminal  enterprise  is  a 
direct  encouragement  of  crime.  So  odious  is  the 
character  of  a  spy,  that  his  ignominy  is  shared  by 
his  employers,  against  whom  public  feeling  has 
never  failed  to  pronounce  itself,  in  proportion  to  the 
infamy  of  the  agent,  and  the  complicity  of  those 
whom  he  served. 

Three  years  later,  the  conduct  of  a  spy  named 
Edwards,   in    connection    with    the   Cato  The  spy 

Edwaxds, 

Street  Conspiracy,  attracted  imusual  ob-  1820. 
loquy.  For  months  he  had  been  at  once  an  active 
conspirator  and  the  paid  agent  of  the  government ; 
prompting  crimes,  and  betraying  his  accomplices. 
Thistlewood  had  long  been  planning  the  assassina- 
tion of  the  ministers ;  and  Edwards  had  urged  him 
to  attempt  that  monstrous  crime,  the  consummation 
of  which  his  treachery  prevented.  He  had  himself 
suggested  other  crimes,  no  less  atrocious.  He  had 
counselled  a  murderous  outrage  upon  the  House  of 
Commons ;  and  had  distributed  hand  grenades 
among  his  wretched  associates,  in  order  to  tempt 
them  to  deeds  of  violence.^     The  conspirators  were 

»  Ann.  Eeg.,  1820,  p.  30  ;  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  i.  54,  242;  Lord 
Sidmouth's  Life,  iii.  216  ;  Edinb.  Eev.,  xxxiii.  211 ;  St.  Tr.,  xxxiii. 
749,  754,  987,  1004,  1435. 


44  Liberty  of  the  Subject. 

justly  hung :  the  devilish  spy  was  hidden  and  re- 
warded. Infamy  so  great  and  criminal  in  a  spy  had 
never  yet  been  exposed:  but  the  frightfulness  of 
the  crime  which  his  information  had  prevented,  and 
the  desperate  character  of  the  men  who  had  plotted 
it,  saved  ministers  from  much  of  the  odium  that  had 
attached  to  their  connection  with  Oliver.  They 
had  saved  themselves  from  assassination ;  and  could 
they  be  blamed  for  having  discovered  and  prevented 
the  bloody  design?  The  crime  had  been  plotted 
in  darkness  and  secrecy,  and  countermined  by  the 
cunning  and  treachery  of  an  accomplice.  That  it 
had  not  been  consummated,  was  due  to  the  very 
agency  which  hostile  critics  sought  to  condemn. 
But  if  ministers  escaped  censure,  the  iniquity  of  the 
spy-system  was  illustrated  in  its  most  revolting 
aspects. 

Again,  in  1833,  complaint  was  made  that  the 
Detective  police  had  bcou  concerned  in  equivocal 
police.  practices,  too  much  resembling  the  treach- 

ery of  spies :  but  a  parliamentary  inquiry  elicited 
little  more  than  the  misconduct  of  a  single  police- 
man, who  was  dismissed  from  the  force.  ^  And  the 
organisation  of  a  well-qualified  body  of  detective 
police  has  at  once  facilitated  the  prevention  and 
discovery  of  crime,  and  averted  the  worst  evils 
incident  to  the  employment  of  spies. 

Akin  to  the  use  of  spies,  to  watch  and  betray  the 
Opening  ^^^^  ^^  mcu,  is  the  intrusion  of  government 
lettei-s.         ^j^^Q  ^i^g  confidence  of  private  letters,  en- 

'  Petition  of  F.  Young  and  others  ;  Commons'  Kep.  1833  ;  Hans. 
Deb.,  3rd  Ser,,  xviii.  1359  :  xx.  404,  834. 


opening  Letters,  45 

trusted  to  the  Post-office.  The  state  having  assumed 
a  monopoly  in  the  transmission  of  letters  on  behalf 
of  the  people,  its  agents  could  not  pry  into  their 
secrets  without  a  flagrant  breach  of  trust,  which 
scarcely  any  necessity  could  justify.  For  the  de- 
tection of  crimes  dangerous  to  the  state,  or  society, 
a  power  of  opening  letters  was,  indeed,  reserved  to 
the  secretary  of  state.  But  for  many  years,  ministers 
or  their  subordinate  officers  appear  to  have  had  no 
scruples  in  obtaining  information,  through  the 
Post-office,  not  only  of  plots  and  conspiracies,  but  of 
the  opinions  and  projects  of  their  political  oppo- 
nents. Curiosity  more  often  prompted  this  vexatious 
intrusion  than  motives  of  public  policy. 

The  political  correspondence  of  the  reign  of 
Greorge  III.  affords  conclusive  evidence  that  the 
practice  of  opening  the  letters  of  public  men  at  the 
Post-office,  was  known  to  be  general.  We  find 
statesmen  of  all  parties  alluding  to  the  practice, 
without  reserve  or  hesitation,  and  entrusting  their 
letters  to  private  hands  whenever  their  communica- 
tions were  confidential.^ 

'  Erom  a  great  number  of  examples,  the  following  may  be  se- 
lected : — 

Ixird  Hardwicke,  writing  in  1762  to  Lord  Eockingham  of  the 
Duke  of  Devonshire's  spirited  letter  to  the  Duke  of  Newcastle,  said : 
*  Which  his  grace  judged  very  rightly  in  sending  by  the  common  post, 
and  trusting  to  their  curiosity,' — Eockingham  Mem.,  i,  157. 

Mr.  Hans  Stanley,  writing  to  Mr.  Grenville,  Oct.  14th,  1765,  says  : 
'  Though  this  letter  contains  nothing  of  consequence,  I  chuse  to  send 
it  by  a  private  hand,  observing  that  all  my  correspondence  is  opened 
in  a  very  awkward  and  bungling  manner,  which  I  intimate  in  case 
you  should  chuse  to  write  anything  which  you  would  not  have  pub- 
lick.' —  Grenville  Papers,  iii.  99.  Again,  Mr.  Whately,  writing  to 
Mr.  Grenville,  June  4th,  1768,  says  :  '  I  may  have  some  things  to 
say  which  I  would  not  tell  the  postmaster,  and  for  that  reason  have 
chosen  this  manner  of  conveyance.' — Ibid.,  iv.  299. 


46  Liberty  of  the  Subject. 

Traces  of  this  discreditable  practice,  so  far  as  it 
ministered  to  idle  or  malignant  curiosity,  have  dis- 
appeared since  the  early  part  of  the  present  century. 
From  that  period,  the  general  correspondence  of 
the  country,  through  the  Post-office,  has  been  in- 
violable. But  for  purposes  of  police  and  diplomacy, 
— to  thwart  conspiracies  at  home,  or  hostile,  com- 
binations abroad, — the  secretary  of  state  has  con- 
tinued, until  our  own  time,  to  issue  warrants  for 
opening  the  letters  of  persons  suspected  of  crimes, 
or  of  designs  injm-ious  to  the  state.  This  power, 
sanctioned  by  long  usage,  and  by  many  statutes,  had 
been  continually  exercised  for  two  centuries.  But 
Petition  of  it  had  passed  without  observation  until 
and  others,     1844,  whou  a  petition  was  presented  to  the 

June  14th,  ?  jr  jt 

1844.  House  of  Commons  from  four  persons, — of 

whom  the  notorious  Joseph  Mazzini  was  one, — com- 
plaining that  their  letters  had  been  detained  at  the 
Post-office,  broken  open,  and  read.  Sir  James 
G-raham,   the   secretary  of  state,  denied   that   the 


Lord  Temple,  writing  to  Mr.  Beresford,  Oct.  23rd,  1783,  says: 
'  The  shameful  liberties  taken  with  my  letters,  both  sent  and  received 
(for  even  the  speaker's  letter  to  me  had  been  opened)  make  me 
cautious  on  politics.'— 5ertfs/'(9rd!  Correspondence,  i.  243. 

Mr.  Pitt,  writing  to  Lady  Chatham,  Nov.  11th,  1783,  said:  'I  am 
afraid  it  will  not  be  easy  for  me,  by  the  post,  to  be  anything  else 
than  a  f  1 '^ hionable  correspondent,  for  I  believe  the  fashion  which 
prevails,  of  opening  almost  every  letter  that  is  sent,  makes  it  almost 
impossible  to  write  anything  worth  reading.' — Lord  Stanhope's  Life  of 
Pitt,  i.  136. 

Lord  Melville,  writing  to  Mr.  Pitt,  April  3rd,  1804,  said :  '  I  shall 
continue  to  address  you  through  Alexander  Hope's  conveyance,  as  I 
remember  our  friend  Bathurst  very  strongly  hinted  to  me  last  year, 
to  beware  of  the  Post-of&ce,  when  you  and  I  had  occasion  to  corre- 
spond on  critical  points,  or  in  critical  times.' — Ibid.,  iv.  145;  see 
also  Currie's  Life,  ii.  160  ;  Stephens'  Mem.  of  Home  Tooke,  ii.  118; 
Court  and  Cab.  of  George  III.,  iii.  265,  &c. 


opening  Letters.  47 

letters  of  three  of  these  persons  had  been  opened : 
but  avowed  that  the  letters  of  one  of  them  had  been 
detained  and  opened  by  his  warrant,  issued  under 
the  authority  of  a  statute.^  Never  had  any  avowal, 
from  a  minister,  encountered  so  general  a  tumult 
of  disapprobation.  Even  Lord  Sidmouth's  spy-system 
had  escaped  more  lightly.  The  public  were  igno- 
rant of  the  law,  though  renewed  seven  years  before,^ 
— and  wholly  unconscious  of  the  practice  which  it 
sanctioned.  Having  believed  in  the  security  of  the 
Post-office,  they  now  dreaded  the  betrayal  of  all 
secrecy  and  confidence.  A  general  system  of  espion- 
age being  suspected,  was  condemned  with  just  in- 
dignation. 

Five-and-twenty  years  earlier,  a  minister, — secure 
of  a  parliamentary  majority,  —  having  ParUa- 
haughtily  defended  his  own  conduct,  would  inquiries. 
have  been  content  to  refuse  further  inquiry,  and 
brave  public  opinion.  And  in  this  instance,  inquiry 
was  at  first  successfully  resisted :  ^  but  a  few  days 
later,  Sir  James  Grraham  adopted  a  course,  at  once 
significant  of  the  times,  and  of  his  own  confidence 
in  the  integrity  and  good  faith  with  which  he  had 
discharged  a  hateful  duty.  He  proposed  the  ap- 
pointment of  a  secret  committee,  to  investigate  the 
law  in  regard  to  the  opening  of  letters,  and  the 
mode  in  which  it  had  been  exercised.''     A  similar 


>  Hans,  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  Ixxv.  892. 

2  Post-office  Act,  1837,  1  Vict.  c.  33,  s.  25. 

2  June  24th,  1844 ;  Mr.  Duncombe's  motion  for  a  committee — 
Ayes,  162  ;  Noes,  2^Q.—Hans.  Leb.,  3rd  Ser.,  Ixxv.  1264. 

*  July  2nd,  as  an  amendment  to  another  motion  of  Mr.  Duncombe ; 
Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  Ixxvi.  212. 


48  Liberty  of  the  Subject. 

committee  was  also  appointed  in  the  House  of  Lords.^ 
These  committees  were  constituted  of  the  most  emi- 
nent and  impartial  men  to  be  found  in  Parliament ; 
and  their  inquiries,  while  eliciting  startling  revela- 
tions as  to  the  practice,  entirely  vindicated  the  per- 
sonal conduct  of  Sir  James  Grraham.  It  appeared 
that  foreign  letters  had,  in  early  times,  been  con- 
stantly searched  to  detect  correspondence  with  Kome, 
and  other  foreign  powers :  that  by  orders  of  both 
Houses,  during  the  Long  Parliament,  foreign  mails 
had  been  searched ;  and  that  Cromwell's  Postage 
Act  expressly  authorised  the  opening  of  letters,  in 
order  '  to  discover  and  prevent  dangerous  and  wicked 
designs  against  the  peace  and  welfare  of  the  com- 
monwealth.' Charles  II.  had  interdicted,  by  pro- 
clamation, the  opening  of  any  letters,  except  by 
warrant  from  the  secretary  of  state.  By  an  act  of 
the  9th  Anne,  the  secretary  of  state  first  received 
statutory  power  to  issue  warrants  for  the  opening  of 
letters ;  and  this  authority  had  been  continued  by 
several  later  statutes  for  the  regulation  of  the  Post- 
office.  In  1783,  a  similar  power  had  been  entrusted 
to  the  Lord  Lieutenant  of  Ireland.^  In  1722, 
several  letters  of  Bishop  Atterbury  having  been 
opened,  copies  were  produced  in  evidence  against 
him,  on  the  bill  of  pains  and  penalties.  During  the 
rebellion  of  1745,  and  at  other  periods  of  public 
danger,  letters  had  been  extensively  opened.  Nor 
were  warrants  restricted  to  the  detection  of  crimes 
or  practices  dangerous  to  the  state.  They  had  been 
constantly  issued  for  the  discovery  of  forgery  and 
»  Hans.  Deb.,  3i^  Ser.,  Ixxvi.  296.  =  23  &  24  Geo.  III.  c.  17. 


Protectio7i  of  Foreigners.  49 

other  offences,  on  the  application  of  the  parties  con- 
cerned in  the  apprehension  of  offenders.  Since 
the  commencement  of  this  century,  they  had  not 
exceeded  an  annual  average  of  eight.  They  had  been 
issued  by  successive  secretaries  of  state,  of  every 
party,  and  except  in  periods  of  unusual  disturbance, 
in  about  the  same  annual  numbers.  The  public 
and  private  correspondence  of  the  country,  both 
foreigTi  and  domestic,  practically  enjoyed  complete 
security.  A  power  so  rarely  exercised  could  not 
have  materially  advanced  the  ends  of  justice.  At 
the  same  time,  if  it  were  wholly  withdrawn,  the 
Post-office  would  become  the  privileged  medium  of 
criminal  correspondence.  No  amendment  of  the 
law  was  recommended ;  and  the  secretary  of  state 
retains  his  accustomed  authority.*  But  no  one  can 
doubt  that,  if  used  at  all,  it  will  be  reserved  for 
extreme  occasions,  when  the  safety  of  the  state  de- 
mands the  utmost  vigilance  of  its  guardians. 

Nothing  has  served  so  much  to  raise,  in  other 
states,  the  estimation  of  British  liberty,  as  Protection 

,  .    ,  1  /v'      1  p        offoreign- 

the  protection  which  our  laws  afford  to  fo-  ers. 
reigners.  Our  earlier  history,  indeed,  discloses  many 
popular  jealousies  of  strangers  settling  in  this 
country.  But  to  foreign  merchants  special  con- 
sideration was  shown  by  Magna  Charta ;  and  what- 
ever the  policy  of  the  state,  or  the  feelings  of  the 
people,  at  later  periods,  aliens  have  generally  en- 
joyed the  same  personal  liberty  as  British  subjects, 
and  complete   protection   from   the  jealousies  and 

•  Eeports  of  Secret  Committees  of  Lords  and  Commons ;  and  see 
Torrens'Life  of  Sir  J.  Graham,  ii.  285-349. 
VOL.    III.  E 


50  Liberty  of  the  Stibjecf, 

Tengeance  of  foreign  powers.  It  has  been  a  proud 
distinction  for  England  to  afford  an  inviolable 
asylum  to  men  of  every  rank  and  condition,  seeking 
refuge  on  her  shores,  from  persecution  and  danger 
in  their  own  lands.  England  was  a  sanctuary  to 
the  Flemish  refugees  driven  forth  by  the  cruelties 
of  Alva ;  to  the  Protestant  refugees  who  fled  from 
the  persecutions  of  Louis  XIV. ;  and  to  the  Ca- 
tholic nobles  and  priests  who  sought  refuge  from 
the  bloody  guillotine  of  revolutionary  France.  All 
exiles  from  their  own  country — whether  they  fled 
from  despotism  or  democracy, — whether  they  were 
kings  discrowned,  or  humble  citizens  in  danger, 
■ — have  looked  to  England  as  their  home.  Such 
refugees  were  safe  from  the  dangers  which  they  had 
escaped.  No  solicitation  or  menace  from  their  own 
government  could  disturb  their  right  of  asylum; 
and  they  were  equally  free  from  molestation  by  the 
municipal  laws  of  England.  The  crown  indeed  had 
claimed  the  right  of  ordering  aliens  to  withdraw 
from  the  realm  :  but  this  prerogative  had  not  been 
exercised  since  the  reign  of  Elizabeth.^  From  that 
period, — through  civil  wars  and  revolutions,  a  dis- 
puted succession,  and  treasonable  plots  against  the 
state,  no  foreigners  had  been  disturbed.  If  guilty 
of  crimes,  they  were  punished :  but  otherwise  en- 
joyed the  full  protection  of  the  law. 

It  was  not  until  1793,  that  a  departure  from  this 

Alien  Act,     geucrous  policy  was  deemed  necessary,  in 

^"^^-  the  interests  of  the  state.     The  revolution 

in  France  had  driven  hosts  of  political  refugees  to 

»  Viz.,  in  1571,  1574,  and  1575. 


L 


Protection  of  Foreigners.  51 

our  shores.^  They  were  pitied,  and  would  be  wel- 
come. But  among  the  foreigners  claiming  our 
hospitality.  Jacobin  emissaries  were  suspected  of 
conspiring,  with  democratic  associations  in  England, 
to  overthrow  the  government.  To  guard  against 
the  machinations  of  such  men,  ministers  sought 
extraordinary  powers  for  the  supervision  of  aliens, 
and,  if  necessary,  for  their  removal  from  the  realm. 
Whether  this  latter  power  may  be  exercised  by 
the  crown,  or  had  fallen  into  desuetude,  became  a 
subject  of  controversy  :  but  however  that  might  be, 
the  provisions  of  the  Alien  Bill,  now  proposed,  far 
exceeded  the  limits  of  any  ancient  prerogative.  An 
account  was  to  be  taken  of  all  foreigners  arriving  at 
the  several  ports,  who  were  to  bring  no  arms  or 
ammunition  :  they  were  not  to  travel  without  pass- 
ports :  the  secretary  of  state  might  remove  any 
suspected  alien  out  of  the  realm;  and  all  aliens 
might  be  directed  to  reside  in  such  districts  as  were 
deemed  necessary  for  public  'security,  where  they 
would  be  registered,  and  required  to  give  up  their 
arms.  Such  restraints  upon  foreigners  were  novel, 
and  wholly  inconsistent  with  the  free  and  liberal 
spirit  with  which  they  had  been  hitlierto  enter- 
tained. Marked  with  extreme  jealousy  and  rigour, 
they  could  only  be  justified  by  the  extraordinary 
exigency  of  the  times.  They  were,  indeed,  equi- 
valent to  a  suspension  of  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act, 
and  demanded  proofs  of  public  danger  no  less  con- 
clusive.    In  opposition  to  the  measure,  it  was  said 

'  In  Dec.  1792,  it  appeared  that  8,000  had  emigrated  to  England. 
—Tarl.  Hist.,  xxx.  147. 

E  2 


52  Libe7^ty  of  the  Subject. 

that  there  was  no  evidence  of  the  presence  of  dan- 
gerous aliens  :  that  discretionary  power  to  be  en- 
trusted to  the  executive  might  be  abused ;  and  that 
it  formed  part  of  the  policy  of  ministers  to  foment 
the  public  apprehensions.  But  the  right  of  the 
state,  on  sufficient  grounds,  to  take  such  precau- 
tions, could  not  be  disputed.^  The  bill  was  to  con- 
tinue in  force  for  one  year  only,^  and  was  passed 
without  difficulty. 

So  urgent  was  deemed  the  danger  of  free  inter- 
Traitorous  coursc  with  the  Continent  at  this  period, 
SfBin',  ^^^  eNQXs.  British  subjects  were  made 
^^^^'  liable  to  unprecedented  restraints,  by  the 

Traitorous  Correspondence  Bill.^ 

The  Alien  Bill  was  renewed  from  time  to  time  ; 
Alien  Bill  ^^^  throughout  the  year  foreigners  con- 
renewed.  tiuucd  uudcr  strict  survcillance.  When 
peace  was  at  length  restored,  goverimient  relaxed 
the  more  stringent  provisions  of  the  war  alien  bills ; 
and  proposed  measures  better  suited  to  a  time  of 
peace.  This  was  done  in  1802,  and  again  in  1814. 
But,  in  1816,  when  public  tranquillity  prevailed 
throughout  Europe,  the  propriety  of  continuing 
such  measures,  even  in  a  modified  form,  was  strenu- 
ously contested.* 

Again,  in  1818,  opposition  no  less  resolute  was 
Alien  Bill  offered  to  the  renewal  of  the  Alien  Bill. 
1818,  Ministers   were   urged    to   revert   to    the 

liberal  policy  of  former  times,  and  not  to  insist  fur- 

^  Pari.  Hist.,  xxx.  155-238.  2  33  Geo.  III.  c.  4. 

»  Pari.  Hist.,  xxx.  582,  928. 

*  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxxiv.  430,  617. 


I 


Protection  of  Foi^eigners,  53 

ther  upon  jealous  restrictions  and  invidious  powers. 
The  hardships  which  foreigners  might  sufifer  from 
sudden  banishment  were  especially  dwelt  upon. 
Men  who  had  made  England  their  home, — bound  to 
it  by  domestic  ties  and  affections,  and  carrying  on 
trade  under  protection  of  its  laws, — were  liable, 
without  proof  of  crime,  on  secret  information,  and 
by  a  clandestine  procedure,  to  one  of  the  gravest 
punishments.^  This  power,  however,  was  rarely 
exercised,  and  in  a  few  years  was  surrendered.^ 
During  the  political  convulsions  of  the  continent  in 
1848,  the  executive  again  received  authority,  for  a 
limited  time,  to  remove  any  foreigners  who  might 
be  dangerous  to  the  peace  of  the  country :  ^  but  it 
was  not  put  in  force  in  a  single  instance."*  The 
law  has  still  required  the  registration  of  aliens :  ^ 
but  its  execution  has  fallen  more  and  more  into 
disuse.  The  confidence  of  our  policy,  and  the 
prodigious  intercourse  developed  by  facilities  of 
communication  and  the  demands  of  commerce, 
have  practically  restored  to  foreigners  that  entire 
freedom  which  they  enjoyed  before  the  French 
Revolution. 

The  improved  feeling  of  Parliament  in  regard  to 
foreigners    was    marked    in  1844   by  Mr.  NaturaUsa- 
Hutt's  wise  and   liberal   measure  for  the  i844. 
naturalisation  of  aliens.^     Confidence  succeeded  to 
jealousy ;    and  the  legislature,  instead  of  devising 

'  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxxTiii.  521,  735,  811,  &c. ;  58  Geo.  IIL 
e.  96. 

2  In  1826:  5  Geo.  IV.  c.  37  ;  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  x.  1376. 
»  11  &  12  Vict.  c.  20.  *  Pari.  Eeturn,  1850  (688). 

*  7  Geo.  IV.  c.  54  ;  6  &  7  Will.  IV.  c.  11. 
s  7  &  8  Vict.  c.  66 ;  10  &  11  Vict.  c.  83. 


54  Liberty  of  tJie  Subject. 

impediments  and  restraints,  offered  welcome  and 
citizenship. 

While  the  law  had  provided  for  the  removal  of 
Right  of  aliens,  it  was  for  the  safety  of  England, — 
SlvS?hn.  ^<^^  ^^^  ^^  satisfaction  of  other  states. 
paired.  rj^j^^  right  of  asjlum  was  as  inviolable  as 
ever.  It  was  not  for  foreign  governments  to  dictate 
to  England  the  conditions  on  which  aliens  under 
her  protection  should  be  treated.  Of  this  principle, 
the  events  of  1802  offered  a  remarkable  illustration. 

During  the  short  peace  succeeding  the  treaty  of 
Napoleon's     Amicus,  Napolcou,   First   Consul   of    the 

demands  in  i-r»  it 

1802.  French  Eepublic,  demanded  that  our  go- 

vernment should  '  remove  out  of  the  British  do- 
minions all  the  French  princes  and  their  adherents, 
together  with  the  bishops  and  other  individuals, 
whose  political  principles  and  conduct  must  neces- 
sarily occasion  great  jealousy  to  the  French  Go- 
vernment.' ^ 

To  this  demand  Lord  Hawkesbury  replied,  his 
Majesty  '  certainly  expects  that  all  foreigners  who 
may  reside  within  his  dominions  should  not  only 
hold  a  conduct  conformable  to  the  laws  of  the 
country,  but  should  abstain  from  all  acts  which 
may  be  hostile  to  the  government  of  any  country, 
with  which  his  Majesty  may  be  at  peace.  As  long, 
however,  as  they  conduct  themselves  according  to 
these  principles,  his  Majesty  would  feel  it  incon- 
sistent with  his  dignity,  with  his  honour,  and  with 
the  common  laws  of  hospitality,  to  deprive  them  of 

'  Mr.  Merry  to  Lord  Hawkesbury,  June  4tli,  1802 ;  Pari.  Hist., 
XXX.  1263. 


Protection  of  Foreigners.  55 

that  protection  which  individuals,  resident  in  his 
dominions,  can  only  forfeit  by  their  own  mis- 
conduct.' ^ 

Still  more  decidedly  were  these  demands  reiterated. 
It  was  demanded,  1st.  That  more  effectual  measures 
should  be  adopted  for  the  suppression  of  seditious 
publications.  2nd.  That  certain  pei*sons  named 
should  be  sent  out  of  Jersey.  3rd.  '  That  the  for- 
mer bishops  of  Arras  and  St.  Pol  de  Leon,  and  all 
those  who,  like  them,  under  the  pretext  of  religion, 
seek  to  raise  disturbances  in  the  interior  of  France, 
shall  likewise  be  sent  away.'  4th.  That  Greorges 
and  his  adherents  shall  be  transported  to  Canada. 
5th.  That  the  princes  of  the  House  of  Bourbon  be 
recommended  to  repair  to  Warsaw,  the  residence  of 
the  head  of  their  family.  6th.  That  French  emi- 
grants, wearing  orders  and  decorations  of  the  ancient 
government  of  France,  should  be  required  to  leave 
England.  These  demands  assumed  to  be  based 
upon  a  construction  of  the  recent  treaty  of  Amiens ; 
and  effect  was  expected  to  be  given  to  them,  under 
the  provisions  of  the  Alien  Act.^ 

These   representations  were   frankly   and  boldly 
met.     For  the  repression  of  seditious  writ-  -^  .  ^^ 
ings,  our  government  would  entertain  no  GovSf.^^ 
measure  but  an  appeal  to  the  courts  of  ™^°^" 
law.^     To  apply  the  Alien  Act  in  aid  of  the  law  of 
libel,  and  to  send  foreign  writers  out  of  the  country, 

»  Lord  Hawkesbury  to  Mr.  Merry,  lOtli  June,  1802. 
-  M.  Otto  to  Lord  Hawkesbury,  Aug.  17th,  1802. 
»  See  swpra,  Vol.  II.  p.  332. 


56  Liberty  of  the  Stcbject. 

because  they  were  obnoxious,  not  to  our  own  govern- 
ment, but  to  another,  was  not  to  be  listened  to. 

The  removal  of  other  French  emigrants,  and 
especially  of  the  princes  of  the  House  of  Bourbon, 
was  refused,  and  every  argument  and  precedent 
adduced  in  support  of  the  demand  refuted.^  The 
emigrants  in  Jersey  had  already  removed,  of  their 
own  accord;  and  the  bishops  would  be  required 
to  leave  England  if  it  could  be  proved  that  they 
had  been  distributing  papers  on  the  coast  of 
France,  in  order  to  disturb  the  government :  but 
sufficient  proof  of  this  charge  must  be  given.  As 
regards  M.  Greorges,  who  had  been  concerned  in 
circulating  papers  hostile  to  the  government  in 
France,  his  Majesty  agreed  to  remove  him  from  our 
European  dominions.  The  king  refused  to  with- 
draw the  rights  of  hospitality  from  the  French 
princes,  unless  it  could  be  proved  that  they  were 
attempting  to  disturb  the  peace  between  the  two 
countries.  He  also  declined  to  adopt  the  harsh 
measures  which  had  been  demanded  against  refugees 
who  continued  to  wear  French  decorations.^ 

The  ground  here  taken  has  been  since  maintained. 
Principles      It  is  uot  ouough  that  the  presence  or  acts 

on  which  -.  „        .  i  i  •      i         • 

foreigners  of  a  foreigner  may  be  displeasmg  to  a 
tected.  foreign  power.  If  that  rule  were  accepted, 
where  would  be  the  right  of  asylum  ?  The  refugee 
would  be  followed  by  the  vengeance  of  his  own 
government,  and  driven  forth  from  the  home  he 
had   chosen,   in   a   free    country.      On   this   point, 

'  Mr.  Merry  to  Lord  Hawkesbury,  June  17th,  1802. 
2  Lord  Hawkesbury  to  Mr.  Merry,  Aug.  28th,  1802. 


Protection  of  Foreigners,  57 

Englishmen  have  been  chivalrously  sensitive. 
Having  undertaken  to  protect  the  stranger,  they 
have  resented  any  menace  to  him,  as  an  insult 
to  themselves.  Disaffection  to  the  rulers  of  his 
own  country  is  natural  to  a  refugee  :  his  banish- 
ment attests  it.  Poles  hated  Eussia:  Hungarians 
and  Italians  were  hostile  to  Austria :  French  Eoyal- 
ists  spurned  the  republic  and  the  first  empire : 
Charles  X.  and  Louis  Napoleon  were  disaffected  to 
Louis-Philippe,  King  of  the  French :  legitimists 
and  Orleanists  alike  abhorred  the  French  republic 
of  1848,  and  the  revived  empire  of  1852.  But  all 
were  safe  under  the  broad  shield  of  England.  Every 
political  sentiment,  every  discussion  short  of  libel, 
enjoyed  freedom.  Every  act  not  prohibited  by 
law,— however  distasteful  to  other  states, — was 
entitled  to  protection.  Nay  more  :  large  numbers 
of  refugees,  obnoxious  to  their  own  rulers,  were 
maintained  by  the  liberality  of  the  English  govern- 
ment. 

This  generosity  has  sometimes  been  abused  by 
aliens,  who,  under  cover  of  our  laws,  have  The  orsini 
plotted  against  friendly  states.  There  are  isss. 
acts,  indeed,  which  the  laws  could  only  have  tole- 
rated by  an  oversight ;  and  in  this  category  was  that 
of  conspiracy  to  assassinate  the  sovereign  of  a  friendly 
state.  The  horrible  conspiracy  of  Orsini,  in  18585 
had  been  plotted  in  England.  Not  countermined 
by  espionage,  nor  checked  by  jealous  restraints  on 
personal  liberty,  it  had  been  matured  in  safety ;  and 
its  more  overt  acts  had  afterwards  escaped  the 
vigilance  of  the  police  in  France.     The  crime  was 


58  Liberty  of  the  Sttbject. 

execrated  :  but  how  could  its  secret  conception  have 
been  prevented?  So  far  our  laws  were  blameless. 
The  government  of  France,  however,  in  the  excite- 
ment of  recent  danger,  angrily  remonstrated  against 
the  alleged  impunity  of  assassins  in  this  country.^ 
Englishmen  repudiated,  with  just  indignation,  any 
tolerance  of  murder.  Yet  on  one  point  were  our 
laws  at  fault.  Orsini's  desperate  crime  was  unex- 
ampled ;  planned  in  England,  it  had  been  executed 
beyond  the  limits  of  British  jurisdiction ;  it  was 
doubtful  if  his  confederates  could  be  brought  to 
justice  ;  and  certain  that  they  would  escape  without 
adequate  punishment.  Ministers,  believing  it  due. 
Conspiracy  ^^  "^^^^  ^^  Frauce  than  to  the  vindication 
BiufpebJ  of  0^^  <^wn  laws,  that  this  anomaly  should 
8th,  1858.  ^g  corrected,  proposed  a  measure,  with  that 
object,  to  Parliament.  But  the  Conomons,  resent- 
ing imputations  upon  this  country,  which  had  not 
yet  been  repelled ;  and  jealous  of  the  apparent 
dictation  of  France,  under  which  they  were  called 
upon  to  legislate,  refused  to  entertain  the  bill.^  A 
powerful  ministry  was  struck  down ;  and  a  rupture 
hazarded  with  the  Emperor  of  the  French.  Yet  to 
the  measure  itself,  apai-t  from  the  circumstances 
tmder  which  it  was  offered,  no  valid  objection  could 
be  raised ;  and  three  years  later,  its  provisions  were 
silently  admitted  to  a  place  in  our  revised  criminal 
laws.^ 

A  just  protection  of  political  refugees  is  not  incom- 

»  Despatch  of  Count  Walewski,  Jan.  20th,  1858. 
-  Mr.  Milner  Gibson's  amendment  on  second  reading. — Hans.  Deb., 
3rd  Ser.,  cxlviii.  1742,  &c. 
»  24  &  25  Vict.  c.  100,  §  4. 


Protection  of  Foreigna^s.  59 

patible  with  the  surrender  of  criminals.  All  na- 
tions have  a  common  interest  in  the  punish-  Extradi- 
ment  of  heinous  crimes ;  and  upon  this  treaties. 
principle,  England  entered  into  extradition  treaties 
with  France,  and  the  United  States  of  America,  for 
mutually  delivering  up  to  justice  persons  charged 
with  murder,  piracy,  arson,  or  forgery,  committed 
within  the  jurisdiction  of  either  of  the  contracting 
states.^  England  offers  no  asylum  to  such  criminals ; 
and  her  own  jurisdiction  has  been  vastly  extended 
over  offenders  escaping  from  justice.  It  is  a  wise 
policy, — conducive  to  the  comity  of  civilised  nations. 

*  Treaty  with  France,  1843,  confirmed  "by  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  75; 
treaty  with  United  States,  1 842,  confirmed  by  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  76. 
Provisions  to  the  same  effect  had  been  comprised  in  the  treaty  of 
Amiens;  and  also  in  a  treaty  with  the  United  States  in  1794. — 
Fhillimore,  Int.  Law,  i.  427  ;  Hans.  Deb,,  3rd  Ser.,  Ixx.  1325;  Ixxi. 
664.  In  1862,  after  the  period  of  this  history,  the  like  arrangement 
was  made  with  Denmark;  25  &  26  Vict.  c.  70.  In  1864,  a  similar 
treaty  was  entered  into  with  Prussia,  but  not  confij-med  by  Parlia- 
ment ;  Hans.  Deb.,  25th  and  27th  July.  See  also  '  The  Extradition 
Act,'  1870.' 


6o  Religious  Liberty. 


CHAPTEE  XII. 

RELATIONS  OF  THE  CHTJECH  TO  POLITICAL  HISTOEY : — LEADING  INCI- 
DENTS AND  CONSEQUENCES  OF  THE  EEFOBMATION  IN  ENGLAND, 
SCOTLAND,  AND  IRELAND  : — EXACTION  OF  CONFORMITY  "WITH  THE 
STATE  CHURCH  : SKETCH  OF  THE  PENAL  CODE  AGAINST  ROMAN- 
CATHOLICS    AND     NONCONFORMISTS  : — STATE    OF    THE   CHURCH   AND 

OTHER    RELIGIOUS    BODIES    ON    THE    ACCESSION   OF   GEORGE  III.  ! 

GENERAL  RELAXATION   OF   THE   PENAL  CODE  : — HISTORY   OF   CATHO- 
LIC  CLAIMS   PRIOR   TO   THE   REGENCY. 

In  the  sixteenth  century,  the  history  of  the  church 
Eeiations  IS  the  history  of  England.  In  the  seven- 
chnrchto      tceuth  ccntury,  the  relations  of  the  church 

lX)litical 

history.  to  the  stato  and  society,  contributed,  with 
political  causes,  to  convulse  the  kingdom  with  civil 
wars  and  revolutions.  And  in  later  and  more  settled 
times,  they  formed  no  inconsiderable  part  of  the 
political  annals  of  the  country.  The  struggles,  the 
controversies,  the  polity,  and  the  laws  of  one  age, 
are  the  inheritance  of  another.  Henry  VIII.  and 
Elizabeth  bequeathed  to  their  successors  ecclesias- 
tical strifes  which  have  disturbed  every  subsequent 
reign ;  and,  after  three  centuries,  the  results  of  the 
Eeformation  have  not  yet  been  fully  developed. 

A  brief  review  of  the  leading  incidents  and  conse- 
The  church  c[ii6nces  of  that  momentous  event  will  serve 
SS-^^  to  elucidate  the  later  history  of  the  church 
^^'^°""  and  other  religious  bodies,  in  their  relations 

to  the  state. 

For  centuries,  the  Catholic  church  had   been  at 


The  Reformation.  6 1 

once  the  church  of  the  state,  and  the  chm'ch  of  the 
people.  All  the  subjects  of  the  crown  acknowledged 
her  authority,  accepted  her  doctrines,  participated 
in  her  offices,  and  worshipped  at  her  consecrated 
shrines.  In  her  relations  to  the  state  she  approached 
the  ideal  of  Hooker,  wherein  the  church  and  the 
commonwealth  were  identified:  no  one  being  a 
member  of  the  one,  who  was  not  also  a  member  of 
the  other. ^  But  under  the  shadow  of  this  majestic 
unity  grew  igTiorance,  errors,  superstition,  imperious 
authority  and  pretensions,  excessive  wealth,  and 
scandalous  corruption.  Freedom  of  thought  was 
proscribed.  To  doubt  the  infallible  judgment  of 
the  church  .was  heresy, — a  mortal  sin,  for  which  the 
atonement  was  recantation  or  death.  From  the 
time  of  Wickliffe  to  the  Eeformation,  heresies  and 
schisms  were  rife :  ^  the  authority  of  the  church  and 
the  .influence  of  her  clergy  were  gradually  impaired ; 
and  at  length,  she  was  overpowered  by  the  ecclesi- 
astical revolution  of  Henry  VIII.  With  her  supre- 
macy, perished  the  semblance  of  religious  union  in 
England. 

So  vast  a  change  as  the  Reformation,  in  the  reli- 
gious faith  and  habitudes  of  a  people,  could  ^j^^  ^^_ 
not  have  been  effected,  at  any  time,  without  ^o^^ation. 
wide  and  permanent  dissensions.     When  men  were 
first  invited  to  think,  it  was  not  probable  that  they 

'  Book  viii.,  [2]  Keble's  Ed.  iii.  411.  Bishop  Gardiner  had  al- 
ready expressed  the  same  theory:  '  the  realm  and  the  church  consist 
of  the  same  persons ;  and  as  the  king  is  the  head  of  the  realm,  he 
must,  therefore,  be  head  of  the  church.' — Gilpin^  ii.  29. — See  also 
Gladstone's  State  and  Church,  4th  Ed.,  i.  9-31. 

-  Warner,  i.  527  ;  Kennet's  Hist,  i.  265;  Collier's  Eccl.  Hist.,  i. 
579;  Echard's  Hist.,  159  ;  Burnet's  Hist,  of  the  Eeformation,  i.  27. 


62  Religious  Liberty. 

should  think  alike.  But  the  time  and  circumstances 
of  the  Eeformation  were  such  as  to  aggravate  theo- 
logical schisms,  and  to  em])itter  the  contentions  of 
religious  parties.  It  was  an  age  in  which  power  was 
wielded  with  a  rough  hand ;  and  the  reform  of  the 
church  was  accompanied  with  plunder  and  persecu- 
tion. The  confiscation  of  church  property  envenomed 
the  religious  antipathies  of  the  Catholic  clergy  :  the 
cruel  and  capricious  rigour  with  which  every  com- 
munion was,  in  turn,  oppressed,  estranged  and 
divided  the  laity.  The  changes  of  faith  and  policy, 
— sometimes  progressive,  sometimes  reactionary, — 
which  marked  the  long  and  painful  throes  of  the 
Eeformation,  from  its  inception  under  Henry  VIII. 
to  its  final  consummation  under  Elizabeth,  left  no 
party  without  its  wrongs  and  sufferings. 

Toleration  and  liberty  of  conscience  were  un- 
Toieration  kuowu.  Catholics  and  Protestants  alike 
iinknown.  recoguised  the  duty  of  the  state  to  uphold 
truth  and  repress  error.  In  this  conviction,  reform- 
ing prelates  concurred  with  popes  and  Eoman 
divines.  The  Eeformed  church,  owing  her  very  life 
to  the  right  of  private  judgment,  assumed  the  same 
authority,  in  matters  of  doctrine,  as  the  church  of 
Eome,  which  pretended  to  infallibility.  Not  to 
accept  the  doctrines  or  ceremonies  of  the  state 
church,  for  the  time  being,  was  a  crime  ;  and  con- 
formity with  the  new  faith  as  with  the  old,  was 
enforced  by  the  dungeon,  the  scaffold,  the  gibbet, 
and  the  torch. ^ 

^  '  A  prince  being  God's  deputy,  ought  to  punish  impieties 
against  Grod,'  said  Archbishop  Cranmer  to  Edward  VI. — Burnefs 
Hist.,  i.  111. 


The  Reformation,  63 

The  Reformed  church  being  at  length  established 
under  Elizabeth,  the  policy  of  her  reign  poii^yof 
demands  especial  notice.     Finding  her  fair  Elizabeth, 
realm  distracted  by  the  religious  convulsions  of  the 
last  three  reigns,  she  insisted  upon  absolute  unity. 
She  exacted  a  strait  conformity  of  doctrine  and  ob- 
servance, denied  liberty  of  conscience  to  all  her  sub- 
jects,  and   attached    civil    disabilities    to  ci^i^ig. 
dissent   from   the    state   church.     By   the  abilities, 
first  act  of  her  reign, ^  the  oath  of  supremacy  was 
required  to  be  taken  as  a  qualification   for   every 
ecclesiastical   benefice,    or    civil    ofl&ce    under    the 
crown.    The  act  of  uniformity  ^  enforced,  with  severe 
penalties,  conformity  with  the  ritual  of  the  estab- 
lished church,  and  attendance  upon  its  services.     A 
few  years  later,  the  oath  of  supremacy  was,  for  the 
first  time,  required  to*  be  taken  by  every  member  of 
the  House  of  Commons.^ 

The  Catholics  were  not  only  hostile  to  the  state 
church,  but  disafiected  to  the  queen  her-  TheCa- 

.    f-  tholic  faith 

self.      They   contested   her   rierht   to   the  associated 

•^  ^    ^  °  ,  with 

crown;  and  despairing  of  the  restoration  treason. 
of  the  ancient  faith,  or  even  of  toleration,  during 
her  life,  they  plotted  against  her  throne.  Hence  the 
Catholic  religion  was  associated  with  treason;  and 
the  measm*es  adopted  for  its  repression  were  designed 
as  well  for  the  safety  of  the  state,  as  for  the  discour- 
agement of  an  obnoxious  faith.'* 

To  punish   popish   recusants,  penalties  for  non- 


»  1  Eliz.  c.  1.  -2  Eliz.  c.  2.  '  5  EHz.  c.  1. 

*  13  Eliz.  c.  2;   Burnet's   Hist.,  ii.  354;  Short's  Hist,  of  the 
Church,  273. 


64  Religions  Liberty, 

attendance  upon  the  services  of  the  church  were 
Popish  re-  multiplied,^  and  enforced  with  merciless 
cusants,  rigour.^  The  Catholic  religion  was  utterly- 
proscribed  :  its  priests  were  banished,  or  hiding  as 
traitors:^  its  adherents  constrained  to  attend  the 
services  of  a  church  which  they  spurned  as  schismatic 
and  heretical. 

While  Catholics  were  thus  proscribed,  the  ritual 
Doctrinal  ^^^  politj  of  the  Eeformcd  church  were 
S*Se  R?-"  narrowing  the  foundations  of  the  Protestant 
formation,  establishment.  The  doctrinal  modifications 
of  the  Eoman  creed  were  cautious  and  moderate. 
The  new  ritual,  founded  on  that  of  the  Catholic 
church,'*  was  simple,  eloquent,  and  devotional.  The 
patent  errors  and  superstitions  of  Eome  were  re- 
nounced: but  otherwise  her  doctrines  and  ceremo- 
nies were  respected.  The  extreme  tenets  of  Eome, 
on  the  one  side,  and  of  Greneva  on  the  other,  were 
avoided.  The  design  of  Eeformers  was  to  restore 
the  primitive  church,^  rather  than  to  settle  contro- 
versies already  arising  among  Protestants.®  Such 
moderation, — due  rather  to  the  predilections  of 
Lutheran  Eeformers,  and  the  leaning  of  some  of 
them  to  the  Eoman  faith,  than  to  a  profound  policy, 

»  23  Eliz,  c.  1  ;  29'Eliz.  c.  6 ;  33  Eliz.  c.  2 ;  35  Eliz.  c.  1 ;  Strype's 
Life  of  Whitgift,  95;  Collier's  Eccl.  Hist.,  ii.  637;  Warner,  ii.  287; 
Kennet's  Hist.,  ii.  497. 

-  Lingard,  note  u,  viii.  556 ;  Dodd's  Clmrch  Hist.,  iii.  75 ;  and 
Butler's  Hist.  Mem.  of  the  Catholics,  i.  230. 

3  27  Eliz.  c.  2. 

*  CardweU's  Hist,  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 

^  Bishop  Jewell's  Apology,  cli.vii.  Div.  3,  c.  x.  Div.  1,  &c. ;  Short's 
Hist,  of  the  Church,  238  ;  Mant's  Notes  to  Articles. 

^  La-RTence's  Bampton  Lectures,  237  ;  Short's  Hist.,  199  ;  Eroude's 
Hist.,  vii.  79. 


The  Picritans.  65 

— was  calculated  to  secure  a  wide  conformity.  The 
respect  shown  to  the  ritual,  and  many  of  the  obser- 
vances of  the  Church  of  Eome,  made  the  change  of 
religion  less  abrupt  and  violent  to  the  gTeat  body  of 
the  people.  But  extreme  parties  were  not  to  be 
reconciled.  The  more  faithful  Catholics  refused 
to  renounce  the  supremacy  of  the  Pope,  and  other 
cherished  doctrines  and  traditions  of  their  church. 
Neither  conciliated  by  concessions,  nor  coerced  by 
intimidation,  they  remained  true  to  the  ancient  faith. 
On  the  other  hand,  these  very  concessions  to 
Eomanism  repelled  the  Calvinistic  Keform-  r^^g  py,^. 
ers,  who  spurned  every  vestige  of  the  Eoman  *^°^' 
ritual,  and  repudiated  the  form  of  church  govern- 
ment, which,  with  the  exception  of  the  Papal 
supremacy,  was  maintained  in  its  ancient  integrity. 
They  condemned  every  ceremony  of  the  church  of 
Eome  as  idolatrous  and  superstitious ;  *  they  ab- 
horred episcopacy,  and  favoured  the  Presbyterian 
form  of  government  in  the  church.  Toleration 
might  have  softened  the  asperities  of  theological 
controversy,  until  time  had  reconciled  many  of  the 
differences  springing  from  the  Eeformation.  A  few 
enlightened  statesmen  would  gladly  have  j^jgorous 
practised  it ;  ^  but  the  imperious  temper  of  con-"^^''*^ 
of  the  queen,^  and  the  bigoted  zeal  of  her  ^^'^^^y- 

*  In  matters  of  ceremonial  they  objected  to  the  wearing  of  the  sur- 
plice, the  sign  of  the  cross  and  the  office  of  sponsors  in  baptism;  the 
use  of  the  ring  in  the  marriage  ceremony,  kneeling  at  the  sacrament, 
the  bowing  at  the  name  of  Jesus,  and  music  in  the  services  of  the 
church.  They  also  objected  to  the  ordination  of  priests  without  a 
call  by  their  flocks. — Heylyn's  Hist,  of  the  Presbyterians,  259. 

«  Strype's  Life  of  Whitgift,  i.  431. 

^  Elizabeth's  policy  may  be  described  in  her  own  words :  '  Sh& 
would  suppress  the  papistical  religion,  that  it  should  not  grow;  but 
VOL.  III.  F 


66  Religious  Liberty. 

ruling  cliurchmen,  would  not  suffer  the  least 
liberty  of  conscience.  Not  even  waiting  for  out- 
ward signs  of  departure  from  the  standard  of  the 
church,  they  jealously  enforced  subscription  to  the 
articles  of  religion  ;  and  addressed  searching  interro- 
gatories to  the  clergy,  in  order  to  extort  confessions 
of  doubt  or  nonconformity.^  Even  the  oath  of 
supremacy,  designed  to  discover  Catholics,  was  also 
a  stumbling-block  to  many  Puritans.  The  former 
denied  the  queen's  supremacy,  because  they  still 
owned  that  of  the  Pope;  many  of  the  latter  hesi- 
tated to  acknowledge  it,  as  irreconcilable  with  their 
own  church  polity.  One  party  were  known  to  be 
disloyal:  the  other  were  faithful  subjects  of  the 
crown.  But  conformity  with  the  reformed  ritual, 
and  attendance  upon  the  services  of  the  church, 
were  enforced  against  both,  with  indiscriminating 
rigour.2  jj^  aiming  at  unity,  the  church  fostered 
dissent. 

The  early  Puritans  had  no  desire  to  separate  from 
Growth  of     the  national  church  :  but  were  deprived  of 

noncon-  , 

formity.  their  benefices,  and  cast  forth  by  persecu- 
tion. They  sought  further  to  reform  her  polity  and 
ceremonies,  upon  the  Calvinistic  model ;  and  claimed 
greater  latitude  in  their  own  conformity.  They  ob- 
jected to  clerical  vestments,  and  other  forms,  rather 
than  to  matters  of  faith  and  doctrine;  and  were 

would  root  out  puritanism,  and  the  favourers  thereof.' — Strype's 
Eccl.  Annals,  iv.  242. 

>  Strype's  Eccl.  Annals,  iii.  81 ;  Strype's  Life  of  Whitgift,  iii.  106; 
Fuller's  Church  Hist.,  ix.  156;  Sparrow,  123. 

'  Burnet's  Hist,  of  the  Eeformation,  iii.  587  ;  Short's  Hist,  of  the 
Church,  306  ;  Strype's  Eccl.  Annals,  iv.  93,  et  seq. ;  Strype's  Parker, 
155,  225;  Strype's  Grindal,  99;  Froude's  Hist.,  ii.  134. 


Church  and  State,  67 

slow  to  form  a  distinct  communion.  They  met 
secretly  for  prayer  and  worship,  hoping  that  truth 
and  pure  religion  would  ultimately  prevail  in  the 
church,  according  to  their  cherished  principles, 
as  Protestantism  had  prevailed  over  the  errors  of 
Eome.  The  ideal  of  the  Presbyterians  was  a  national 
church,  to  which  they  clung  through  all  their  suffer- 
ings :  but  they  were  driven  out,  with  stripes,  from 
the  church  of  England.  The  Independents,  claiming 
self-government  for  each  congregation,  repelling  an 
ecclesiastical  polity,  and  renouncing  all  connection 
with  the  state,  naturally  favoured  secession  from  the 
establishment.  Separation  and  isolation  were  the 
very  foundation  of  their  creed ;  *  and  before  the 
death  of  Elizabeth  they  had  spread  themselves 
widely  through  the  country,  being  chiefly  known 
as  Brownists.^  Protestant  nonconformity  had  taken 
root  in  the  land ;  and  its  growth  was  momentous  to 
the  future  destinies  of  church  and  state. 

While  the  Eeformed  church  lost  from  her  fold 
considerable   numbers  of  the   people,  her  ^^^^  ^^^_ 
connection  with   the   state   was  far   more  the^^^-^^ 
intimate  than  that  of  the  church  of  Eome.  cSSch  mth 
There  was  no  longer  a  divided  authority.  *'^®^*^*^' 
The  crown  was  supreme  in  church  and  state  alike. 
The  Eeformed  chm-ch  was  the  creation  of  Parlia- 
ment :  her  polity  and  ritual,  and  even  her  doctrines, 
were  prescribed  by  statutes.     She  could  lay  no  claim 

1  Heylyn's  Hist,  of  the  Presbyterians,  lib.  vi.-x. ;  Neal's  Hist,  of 
the  Puritans,  i.  ch.  iv.  &c. ;  Bogue  and  Bennett's  Hist,  of  Dissenters, 
Intr.  58-65;  i.  109-140;  Price's  Hist,  of  Nonconformity;  Condor's 
View  of  all  Keligions. 

^  The  act  35  Eliz.  c.  1,  was  passed  to  suppress  them. 
F  2 


68  Religio7is  Liberty, 

to  ecclesiastical  independence.  Convocation  was 
restrained  from  exercising  any  of  its  functions  with- 
out the  king's  licence.*  No  canons  had  force  without 
his  assent ;  and  even  the  subsidies  granted  by  the 
clergy,  in  convocation,  were  henceforward  confirmed 
by  Parliament.  Bishops,  dignitaries  and  clergy 
looked  up  to  the  crown,  as  the  only  source  of  power 
within  the  realm.  Laymen  administered  justice  in 
the  ecclesiastical  courts  ;  and  expounded  the  doc- 
trines of  the  church.  Lay  patronage  placed  the 
greater  part  of  the  benefices  at  the  disposal  of  the 
crown,  the  barons,  and  the  landowners.  The  consti- 
tution of  the  church  was  identified  with  that  of  the 
state ;  and  their  union  was  political  as  well  as  reli- 
gious. The  church  leaned  to  the  government, 
rather  than  to  the  people;  and,  on  her  side,  be- 
came a  powerful  auxiliary  in  maintaining  the  ascen- 
dency of  the  crown,  and  the  aristocracy.  The  union 
of  ecclesiastical  supremacy  with  prerogatives,  already 
excessive,  dangerously  enlarged  the  power  of  the 
crown  over  the  civil  and  religious  liberties  of  the 
people.  Authority  had  too  strong  a  fulcrum ;  and 
threatened  the  realm  with  absolute  subjection  :  but 
the  wrongs  of  Puritans  produced  a  spirit  of  resist- 
ance, which  eventually  won  for  Englishmen  a  surer 
freedom. 

Meanwhile,  the  Eeformation  had  taken  a  different 
Reforma-  couTse  iu  Scotland.  The  Calvinists  had 
Scotland.  triumphed.  They  had  overthrown  episco- 
pacy, and  established  a  Presbyterian  church,  upon 

»  25  Hen.  VIII.  c.  19 ;  Troude's  Hist.,  ii.  193-198,  325,  \x.  479. 


Chicrch  of  Scotland.  '        69 

their  own  cherished  model. ^  Their  creed  and  polity 
suited  the  tastes  of  the  people,  and  were  accepted 
with  enthusiasm.  The  Catholic  faith  was  renounced 
everywhere  but  in  some  parts  of  the  Highlands  ;  and 
the  Eeformed  establishment  at  once  assumed  the 
comprehensive  character  of  a  national  church.  But 
while  supported  by  the  people,  it  was  in  constant 
antagonism  to  the  state.  Its  rulers  repudiated  the 
supremacy  of  the  crown :  ^  resisted  the  jurisdiction 
of  the  civil  courts  ;  ^  and  set  up  pretensions  to  spi- 
ritual authority  and  independence,  not  unworthy  of 
the  church  they  had  lately  overthrown.'*  They 
would  not  suffer  temporal  power  to  intrude  upon  the 
spiritual  church  of  Christ.^ 

The  constitution  of  the  Scottish  church  was  re- 
publican :  her  power  at  once  spiritual  and  ^he  ciinrch 
popular.      Instead  of  being  governed  by  °^  ^°^'^^- 

*  1560-1592. — The  events  of  this  period  are  amply  illustrated  in 
Spottiswood's  Hist,  of  the  Church  of  Scotland ;  M'Crie's  Lives  of 
Knox  and  Melville ;  Knox's  Hist,  of  the  Eeformation  ;  Eobertson's 
Hist,  of  Scotland;  Tytler's  Hist,  of  Scotland;  Cook's  Hist,  of  the 
Eeformation  in  Scotland  ;  Cunningham's  Church  Hist.,  i.  351 ;  Eow's 
Hist,  of  the  Kirk  of  Scotland ;  Stephen's  Hist,  of  the  Church  of 
Scotland ;  Buckle's  Hist.,  ii.  ch.  3 ;  Fronde's  Hist.,  vii.  116,  269. 

■^  In  the  Book  of  Polity,  it  is  laid  down  that  •  the  power  ecclesias- 
tical flows  immediately  from  Grod  and  the  Mediator  Jesus  Christ,  and 
is  spiritual,  not  having  a  temporal  head  on  earth,  but  only  Christ, 
the  only  spiritual  governor  and  head  of  his  kirk.' 

3  Cunningham's  Church  Hist.,  535  :  Calderwood's  Hist.,  v.  457- 
460,  475 ;  Spottiswood's  Hist.,  iii.  21  ;  Tytler's  Hist.,  vii.  326 ; 
Buchanan's  Ten  Years'  Conflict,  i.  73-81. 

*  Mr.  Cunningham,  comparing  the  churches  of  Eome  and  Scot- 
land, says :  '  With  both  there  has  been  the  same  union  and  energy  of 
action,  the  same  assumption  of  spiritual  supremacy,  the  same  defi- 
ance of  law  courts,  parliaments,  and  kings.' — Pref.  to  Church  Hist, 
of  Scotland. 

*  '  When  the  church  was  Eoman,  it  was  the  duty  of  the  magistrate 
to  reform  it.  When  the  church  was  Protestant,  it  was  impiety  in 
the  magistrate  to  touch  it.' — Cunningham! s  Church  Hist.,  i.  537. 


70  Religious  Liberty. 

courtly  prelates  and  an  impotent  convocation,  she 
was  represented  by  the  general  assembly, — ^an  eccle- 
siastical Parliament  of  wide  jurisdiction,  little  con- 
trolled by  the  civil  power.  The  leaders  of  that 
assembly  were  bold  and  earnest  men,  with  high 
notions  of  ecclesiastical  authority,  a  democratic 
temper,  and  habitual  reliance  upon  popular  sup- 
port. A  church  so  constituted  was,  indeed,  endowed 
and  acknowledged  by  the  state  :  but  was  more  likely 
to  withstand  the  power  of  the  crown  and  aristocracy, 
than  to  uphold  it. 

The  formal  connection  of  the  church  with  the 
Her  connec-  state  was,  nevertheless,  maintained  with 
the  state.  scarcoly  less  strictness  than  in  England. 
The  new  establishment  was  the  work  of  the  legisla- 
ture ;  the  Protestant  religion  was  originally  adopted  ; 
the  church's  confession  of  faith  ratified  ;  and  the  en- 
tire Presbyterian  polity  established  by  statute.^  And 
further,  the  crown  was  represented  in  her  assembly, 
by  the  Lord  High  Commissioner. 

The  Reformation  had  also  been  extended  to  Ire- 
Reforma-  land  I  but  in  a  manner  the  most  extraordi- 
ireiand.  nary  and  exceptional.  In  England  and 
Scotland,  the  clergy  and  people  had  unquestionably 
been  predisposed  to  changes  in  the  Catholic  church ; 
and  the  reforms  effected  were  more  or  less  the  ex- 
pression of  the  national  will.  But  in  Ireland,  the 
Reformation  was  forced  upon  an  unyielding  priest- 
hood and  a  half-conquered  people.  The  priests 
were   driven   from   their  churches   and   homes,  by 

»  Scots  Acts,  1560;  1567,  c.  4,  6,  7,  1592,  c.  116;  ll\d.,  1690, 
c.  5,  23. 


> 


Reformation  in  Ireland,  71 

ministers  of  the  new  faith, — generally  Englishmen 
or  strangers, — ^who  were  ignorant  of  the  langiiage  of 
their  flocks,  and  indifferent  to  their  conversion  or 
teaching.  Conformity  was  exacted  in  obedience  to 
the  law,  and  under  severe  penalties  :  not  sought  by 
appeals  to  the  reason  and  conscience  of  a  subject 
race.  Who  can  wonder  that  the  Eeformation  never 
took  root  in  Ireland  ?  It  was  accepted  by  the  majo- 
rity of  the  English  colonists :  but  many  who  abjured 
the  CathoUc  faith,  decHned  to  join  the  new  establish- 
ment, and  founded  Presbyterian  communions  of  their 
own.  The  Eeformation  added  a  new  element  of 
discord  between  the  colonists  and  the  natives  :  em- 
bittered the  chronic  discontents  against  the  govern- 
ment ;  and  founded  a  foreign  church,  with  few  com  - 
municants,  in  the  midst  of  a  hostile  and  rebellious 
people.  It  was  a  state  church :  but,  in  no  sense, 
the  church  of  the  nation.^ 

Such  having  been  the  results  of  the  Eeformation, 
the  accession  of  James  united  the  three  rj^e  three 
crowns  of  these   realms;  and  what  were  ^^5^^^^^ 
his  relations  to  the  church?     In  England,  J^«^^- 
he  was  the  head  of  a  state  church,  environed   by 
formidable  bodies  of  Catholics  and  Puritans,      In 
Scotland,  a  Presbyterian  church  had  been  founded 
upon  the  model  approved  by  English  Puritans.     In 
Ireland,  he  was  the  head  of  a  church  maintained  by 
the    sword.      This   incongruous   heritage,  unwisely 
used,  brought  ruin  on   his   royal   house.       Eeared 


'  Leland's  Hist.,  ii.  165,  224,  &c. ;  Lanigan's  Eccl.  Hist.,  iv.  207, 
&c. ;  Mant's  Hist,  of  the  Church  of  Ireland,  i.  ch.  2,  3,  4  ;  Goldwin 
Smith's  Irish  History  and  Irish  Character,  83,  88,  92,  100. 


72  Religious  Liberty, 

among  a  Presbyterian  people,  he  vexed  the  English 
Puritans  with  a  more  rigorous  conformity ;  and 
spurning  the  religion  of  his  own  countrymen,  forced 
upon  them  a  hated  episcopacy,  the  supremacy  of 
the  crown,  and  observances  repugnant  to  their  creed. 
No  less  intolerant  of  his  own  mother's  church,  he 
hastened  to  aggravate  the  penalties  against  Popish 
recusants.  Such  was  his  rancour  that  he  denied 
them  the  right  of  educating  their  children  in  the 
Catholic  faith.^  The  laws  against  them  were  also 
enforced  with  renewed  severity.^  The  monstrous 
plot  of  Guy  Fawkes  naturally  incensed  Parliament 
and  the  people  against  the  whole  body  of  Catholics, 
whose  religion  was  still  associated  with  imminent 
danger  to  the  state ;  and  again  were  treason  and 
Popery  scourged  with  the  same  rod.  Further 
penalties  were  imposed  on  Popish  recusants,  not  at- 
tending the  services  and  sacraments  of  the  church ; 
and  a  new  oath  of  allegiance  was  devised  to  test 
their  loyalty.^  In  Ireland,  Catholic  priests  were 
banished  by  proclamation ;  and  the  laws  rigorously 
enforced  against  the  laity  who  absented  themselves 
from  Protestant  worship.  The  king's  only  claim 
upon  the  favour  of  the  Puritans  was  his  persecution 
of  Papists;  and  this  he  suddenly  renounced.  In 
compliance  with  engagements  entered  into  with 
foreign  powers,  he  began  openly  to  tolerate  the 
Catholics;  and  granted  a  pardon  to  all  who  had 
incurred  the  penalties  of  recusancy.  The  breach 
was  ever  widening  between  the  Puritans  and  the 

>  1  Jac.  I.  c.  4.  2  Lingard's  Hist.,  ix.  41,  55. 

»  3  Jac.  I.  c.  4,  5. 


The  Commoiiwealih.  73 

throne;  and  while  the  monarch  was  asserting  the 
divine  right  of  kings,  his  bishops  were  exalting  pre- 
lacy, and  bringing  the  Eeformed  church  nearer  to 
the  Eomish  model. 

Charles  continued   to   extend  an   indulgence   to 
Catholics,  at  once  offensive  to  the  Puritan  ^^^_ 
party,  and  in  violation  of  laws  which  his  cha?iSi. 
prerogative  could  not  rightfully  suspend.  JJoUcJand 
Even  the  toleration  of  the  Stuarts,  like  ^"^'^^^^ 
their  rigour,  was  beyond  the  law.     The  prerogatives 
and   supremacy  of  the   crown  were   alike   abused. 
Favouring  absolutism  in  the  state,  and  domination 
in  the  church,  Charles  found  congenial  instruments 
of  tyranny  in  the  Star  Chamber  and  High  Commis- 
sion,— in  Strafford  and  in  Laud.     In  England  he 
oppressed  Puritans :  in  Scotland  he  introduced   a 
high   church    liturgy,   which    provoked    rebellion. 
Arbitrary  rule  in  church  and  state  completed  the 
alienation  of  the  Puritan  party ;  and  their  enmity 
was  fatal.     The  church  was  overthrown ;  and  a  re- 
publican commonwealth  established  on  the  ruins  of 
the  monarchy.     The  polity  of  the  Eeformation  was 
riven,  as  by  a  thunderbolt. 

The  Commonwealth  was  generally  favourable  to 
religious  liberty.    The  intolerance  of  Pres-  Religion 
byterians,  indeed,  was  fanatical.^     In  the  common- 
words  of  Milton,  '  new  Presbyter  was  but  '''^^^^^• 

*  Life  of  Baxter,  103.  Their  clergy  in  London  protested  against 
toleration  to  the  Westminster  Assembly,  Dec.  18th,  1645,  saying, 
*  we  cannot  dissemble  how  we  detest  and  abhor  this  much  endea- 
voured toleration.' — Price's  Hist,  of  Nonconformity,  n.  329.  Edwards, 
a  Presbyterian  minister,  denounced  toleration  as  *  the  grand  design 
of  the  devil,'  and  'the  most  ready,  compendious,  and  sure  way  to 
destroy  all  religion,' — '  all  the  devils  in  hell  and  their  instruments 
being  at  work  to  promote  it.' — Gangrcena,  part  i.  58. 


74  Religious  Liberty, 

old  Priest, — writ  large.'  Had  they  been  suffered 
to  exercise  uncontrolled  dominion,  they  would  have 
rivalled  Laud  himself  in  persecution.  But  Crom- 
well guaranteed  freedom  of  worship  to  all  except 
Papists  and  Prelatists ;  declaring  '  that  none  be  com- 
pelled to  conform  to  the  public  religion  by  penalties 
or  otherwise.'  ^  Such  was  his  policy,  as  a  statesman 
and  an  Independent.^  He  extended  toleration  even 
to  the  Jews.^  Yet  was  he  sometimes  led,  by  poli- 
tical causes,  to  put  his  iron  heel  upon  the  bishops 
and  clergy  of  the  Church  of  England,  upon  Eoman 
Catholics,  and  even  upon  Presbyterians.'^  The 
church  party  and  Eoman  Catholics  had  fought  for 
the  king  in  the  civil  war ;  and  the  hands  of  church- 
men and  Puritans  were  red  with  each  others'  blood. 
To  religious  rancour  was  added  the  vengeance  of 
enemies  on  the  battle-field. 

Before  the  king's  fall,  he  had  been  forced  to  re- 
Presby-         store  the  Presbyterian  polity  to  Scotland ;  ^ 

terians  in  in/-^  •  r--  ••/> 

Scotland.  and  the  Covenanters,  m  a  lurious  spirit  of 
fanaticism,  avenged  upon  Episcopalians  the  wrongs 
which  their  cause  had  suffered  in  the  last  two  reigns. 


»  Whitelock's  Mem.,  499,  576,  614 ;  Neal's  Hist,  of  the  Puritans, 
iv.  28,  138,  338,  &c. 

"  Hume  affirms,  somewhat  too  broadly,  that  *  of  all  the  Christian 
sects  this  was  the  first  which  during  its  prosperity  as  well  as  its  ad- 
versity, always  adopted  the  principles  of  toleration.' — Hist.,  v.  168. 
See  also  Neal's  Hist,  of  the  Puritans,  ii.  98;  iv.  144;  Collier,  829  ; 
Hallam's  Const.  Hist.,  i.  621  ;  Short's  Hist.,  425 ;  Brook's  Hist,  of 
Eeligious  Liberty,  i.  504,  513-528. 

3  Bate's  Elen.,  partii.  211. 

<  Lord  Clarendon's  Hist.,  vii.  253,  254  ;  Baxter's  Life,  i.  64 ;  Ken- 
net's  Hist.,  iii.  206;  Neal's  Hist,  of  the  Puritans,  iv.  39,  122,  138, 
144  ;  Hume's  Hist.,  v.  368 ;  Butler's  Eom.  Cath.,  ii.  407 ;  Parr's  Life 
of  Archbishop  Usher ;  Kushworth,  vii.  308,  &c. 

'  In  1641. 


Reign  of  Charles  II.  75 

Every  age  brought  new  discords  ;  and  religious  dif- 
ferences commingled  with  civil  strifes. 

After  the  Eestoration,  Eoundheads  could  expect 
no  mercy  from  Cavaliers  and  churchmen.  Puritans 

under 

They  were  spurned  as  dissenters  and  repub-  ciiaries  n. 
licans.  While  in  the  ascendant,  their  gloomy  fana- 
ticism and  joyless  discipline  had  outraged  the 
natural  sentiments  and  taste  of  the  people;  and 
there  was  now  a  strong  reaction  against  them.  And 
first  the  church  herself  was  to  be  purged  of  Puritans. 
Their  consciences  were  tried  by  a  new  Act  of  Uni- 
formity, which  drove  forth  two  thousand  of  her 
clergy,  and  further  recruited  the  ranks  of  Protes- 
tant nonconformists.^  This  measure,  fruitful  of 
future  danger  to  the  church,  was  followed  by  a 
rigorous  code  of  laws,  proscribing  freedom  of  wor- 
ship, and  multiplying  civil  disabilities,  as  penalties 
for  dissent. 

By  the  Corporation  Act,  none  could  be  elected 
to  a  corporate  office  who  had  not  taken  the  oppressive 
sacrament  within  the  year.^  By  another  reign. 
Act,  no  one  could  serve  as  a  vestryman,  unless  he 
made  a  declaration  against  taking  up  arms  and  the 
covenant,  and  engaged  to  conform  to  the  Liturgy.^ 
The  Five  Mile  Act  prohibited  any  nonconformist 
minister  from  coming  -within  five  miles  of  a  cor- 
porate town ;  and  all  nonconformists,  whether  lay 
or  clerical,  from  teaching  in  any  public  or  private 
school.*     The  monstrous  Conventicle  Act  punished 

'13  «fc   14  Car.  II.  c.  4.     Calamy's  Nonconformist's  Memorial, 
Intr.  31,  &c.  ;  Baxter's  Life  and  Times,  by  Calamy,  i.  181. 
2  13  Car.  II.  Stat.  2,  c.  1.  ^  15  Car.  II.  c.  5. 

M3  &  14  Car.  n.  c.  4. 


76  Religious  Liberty. 

attendance  at  meetings  of  more  than  five  persons,  in 
any  house,  for  religious  worship,  with  imprisonment 
and  transportation.*  This,  again,  was  succeeded  by 
a  new  test,  by  which  the  clergy  were  required  to 
swear  that  it  was  not  lawful,  on  any  pretence  what- 
ever, to  take  up  arms  against  the  king.^  This  test, 
conceived  in  the  spirit  of  the  high  church,  touched 
the  consciences  of  none  but  the  Calvinistic  clergy, 
many  of  whom  refused  to  take  it,  and  further  swelled 
the  ranks  of  dissent. 

While  the  foundations  of  the  church  were  narrowed 
Persecu-  ^J  such  laws  as  thesc,  nonconformists  were 
noncSn-  pursucd  by  incessant  persecutions.  Eight 
formists.  thousand  Protestants  are  said  to  have  been 
imprisoned,  besides  great  numbers  of  Catholics.^ 
Fifteen  hundi-ed  Quakers  were  confined:  of  whom 
three  hundred  and  fifty  died  in  prison.'*  During 
Attempts  this  reign,  indeed,  several  attempts  were 
hension.  made  to  effect  a  reconciliation  between  the 
church  and  nonconformists  :  ^  but  the  irreconcilable 
difierences  of  the  two  parties,  the  unyielding  dispo- 
sition of  churchmen,  and  the  impracticable  temper 
of  nonconformists,  forbad  the  success  of  any  scheme 
of  comprehension. 

^  16  Car.  II.  e.  4,  continued  and  amended  by  22  Car.  II.  c.  1. 

2  17  Car.  II.  c.  2. 

3  Delaune's  Plea  for  Nonconformists,  preface  ;  Short's  Hist.,  559. 
Oldmixon  goes  so  far  as  to  estimate  the  total  number  who  suffered 
on  account  of  their  religion,  during  this  reign,  at  60,000 ! — History 
of  the  Stuarts,  715. 

^  Neal's  Hist,  of  the  Puritans,  v.  17. 

5  The  Savoy  Conference,  1661  ;  Baxter's  Life  and  Times,  i.  139  ; 
Burnet's  Own  Time,  i.  309 ;  Collier's  Church  Hist.,  ii.  879  ;  Perry's 
Hist.,  ii.  317.  In  1669  ;  Baxter's  Life,  iii.  23  ;  Burnet's  Own  Time, 
i.  439  ;  Scheme  of  Tillotson  and  Stillingfleet,  1674;  Burnet's  Life  of 
TiUotson.  42. 


Reigii  of  Charles  II.  '         77 

Nonconformists  having  been  discouraged  at  the 
beginning  of  this  reign,  Catholics  provoked  ^j^^  ^^ 
repression  at  the  end.  In  1673,  Parliament,  ^^^^f 
impelled  by  apprehension  for  the  Protes-  ^^""^^^  "• 
tant  religion  and  civil  liberties  of  the  people,  passed 
the  celebrated  Test  Act.^  Designed  to  exclude 
Eoman  Catholic  ministers  from  the  king's  councils,. 
its  provisions  yet  embraced  Protestant  noncon- 
formists. That  body,  for  the  sake  of  averting  a 
danger  common  to  all  Protestants,  joined  the  church 
in  supporting  a  measure  fraught  with  evil  to  them- 
selves. They  were,  indeed,  promised  further  indul- 
gence in  the  exercise  of  their  religion,  and  even  aa 
exemption  from  the  Test  Act  itself :  but  the  church 
party,  having  secured  them  in  its  toils,  was  in  no 
haste  to  release  them.^ 

The  Church  of  Scotland  fared  worse   than  the 
English  nonconformists,  after  the  Restora-  ci^^rchof 
tion.     Episcopacy  was  restored :  the  king's  afte???- 
supremacy  reasserted :  the  entire  polity  of  ^''^^^^o^* 
the  church  overthrown ;  ^  while  the  wrongs  of  Epis- 
copalians, under  the  Commonwealth,  were  avenged, 
with  barbarous  cruelty,  upon  Presbyterians.'' 

The  Protestant  faith  and  civil  liberties  of  the 
people  being  threatened  by  James  II.,  all  union  of 
classes  of  Protestants  combined  to  expel  dissenters 
him  from  his  throne.     Again  the  noncon-  James  n. 

»  25  Car.  II.  c.  2. 

2  Rennet's  Hist.,  iii.  294;  Burnet's  Own  Time,  i.  348,  616. 

3  Scots  Acts,  1661,  c.  11 ;  1669,  c.  1  ;  1681,  c.  6  ;  WodroVs  Church 
Hist.,  i.  190. 

*  Wodrow's  Church  Hist.,  i.  57,  236,  390,  &c. ;  Burnet's  Own 
Time,  i.  365,  ii.  416,  &c.;  Crookshank's  Hist.,  i.  164,  204,  &c.; 
Buckle's  Hist.,  ii.  281-292 ;  Cunningham's  ChurdiHist.,  ii.  eh.  i.-yi. 


78  Religious  Liberty, 

formists  united  with  tlie  church,  to  resist  a  common 
danger.  They  were  not  even  conciliated  by  his  de- 
clarations of  liberty  of  conscience  and  indulgence,  in 
which  they  perceived  a  stretch  of  prerogative,  and  a 
dangerous  leaning  towards  the  Catholic  faith,  under 
the  guise  of  religious  freedom.  The  revolution  was 
not  less  Protestant  than  political ;  and  Catholics 
were  thrust  further  than  ever  beyond  the  pale  of 
the  constitution. 

The  recent  services  of  dissenters  to  the  church 
TheToie-  ^^^  ^^  Piotestaut  cause  were  rewarded 
ration  Act.  ^^  ^j^g  Tolcratiou  Act.^  This  celebrated 
measure  repealed  none  of  the  statutes  exacting  con- 
formity with  the  Church  of  England :  but  exempted 
all  persons  from  penalties,  on  taking  the  oaths  of 
allegiance  and  supremacy,  and  subscribing  a  declara- 
tion against  transubstantiation.  It  relieved  dis- 
senting ministers  from  the  restrictions  imposed  by 
the  Act  of  Uniformity  and  the  Conventicle  Act, 
upon  the  administration  of  the  sacrament  and 
preaching  in  meetings :  but  required  them  to  sub- 
scribe the  thirty-nine  articles,  with  some  exceptions.^ 
The  dissenting  chapels  were  to  be  registered  ;  and 
their  congregations  protected  from  any  molestation. 
A  still  easier  indulgence  was  given  to  the  Quakers : 
but  toleration  was  withheld  from  Eoman  Catholics 
and  Unitarians,  who  found  no  favour  either  with  the 
church  or  nonconformists. 

The  Toleration  Act,  whatever   its  shortcomings, 

^  1  "Will.  &  Mar.  c.  8;  confirmed  by  10  Anne,  c.  2;  Bogae  and 
Bennett's  Hist,  of  Dissenters,  i.  187-204. 

2  All  except  three  and  part  of  a  fourth.    See  infra^  p.  93. 


Reign  of  William  HI.  79 

was   at  least  the  first  recognition  of  the  right  of 
public  worship,  beyond  the  pale  of  the  state  -^j,^^^  ^f 
chui'ch.     It  was  the  great  charter  of  dis-  ^"rSip 
sent.     Far  from  granting  religious  liberty,  ^^^^^^  • 
it  yet  gave  indulgence  and  security  from  persecution. 
The  age  was  not  ripe  for  wider  principles  of  tole- 
ration.   Catholics  and  Unitarians  were  soon  p^^^her 
afterwards  pursued  with  severer  penalties ;  ^  ^Sf^ 
and  in  1700,  the  intolerant  spirit  of  Par-  SS'^^°' 
liament  was  displayed  by  an  Act, — no  less  ^^*^°^'^^- 
factious  than  bigoted, — which  cannot  be  read  without 
astonishment.     It  offered  a  reward  of  100^.  for  the 
discovery  of    any   Catholic   priest   performing   the 
ofi&ces  of  his  church :  it  incapacitated  every  Eoman 
Catholic  from  inheriting  or  purchasing  land,  unless 
he  abjured  his  religion  upon  oath ;  and  on  his  re- 
fusal, it  vested  his  property,  during  his  life,  in  his 
next  of  kin,  being  a  Protestant.     He  was  even  pro- 
hibited from  sending  his  children  abroad,  to  be  edu- 
cated in  his  own  faith.^     And  while  his  religion  was 
thus  proscribed,  his  civil  rights  were  further  restrained 
by  the  oath  of  abjuration.^ 

Again  the  policy  of  comprehension  was  favoui-ed 
by  William  III. :  but  it  was  too  late.     The  g^iieme  of 
church  was  far  too  strong  to  be  willing  to  ^nS 
sacrifice  her  own  convictions  to  the  scruples  wmlm 
of  nonconformists.     Nor  was  she  forgetful  ™' 
of   her  own  wrongs  under  the  Commonwealth,  or 

»  1  Wm.  &  M.  c.  9,  15,  26 ;  9  &  10  Will.  III.  e.  32. 

2  11  &  12  Will.  III.  c.  4  ;  Burnet's  Own  Time,  iv.  409  ;  Butler's 
Hist.  Mem.  of  the  Catholics,  iii.  134-138,  279;  Burke's  Speech  at 
Bristol,  1780,  Works,  iii.  385. 

3  13  Will.  m.  c.  6. 


^o  Religiotis  Liberty, 

insensible  to  the  sufferings  of  Episcopalians  in  Scot- 
land. On  the  other  side,  the  nonconformists,  con- 
firmed in  their  repugnance  to  the  doctrines  and 
ceremonies  of  the  church,  by  the  persecutions  of  a 
hundred  and  fifty  years,  were  not  to  be  tempted  by 
small  concessions  to  their  consciences,  or  by  the 
doubtful  prospects  of  perferment,  in  an  establish- 
ment from  which  they  could  expect  little  favour.* 
To  the  Church  of  Scotland  the  Kevolution  brought 
churcii  of  fi^eedom  and  favour.  The  king's  supremacy 
^?  ttie  "^^s  finally  renounced ;  Episcopacy,  against 
Bevoiution.  ^j^-^j^  ^^^  ^^^  ^^-^^^  struggled  for  a  hun- 
dred years,  for  ever  abolished;  her  confession  of 
faith  recognised  by  statute ;  and  the  Presbyterian 
polity  confirmed.^  But  William  III.,  in  restoring 
the  privileges  of  the  church,  endeavoured  to  impress 
upon  her  rulers  his  own  moderation  and  tolerant 
spirit.  Fearing  the  persecution  of  Episcopalians  at 
their  hands,  he  wrote  thus  nobly  and  wisely  to  the 
G-eneral  Assembly  :  '  We  expect  that  your  manage- 
ment shall  be  such  that  we  may  have  no  reason  to 
repent  what  we  have  done.  We  never  could  be  of 
the  mind  that  violence  was  suited  to  the  advancing 
of  true  religion :  nor  do  we  intend  that  our  authority 
shall  ever  be  a  tool  to  the  irregular  passions  of  any 
party.' ^  And  not  many  years  afterwards,  when 
Presbyterian  Scotland  was  united  to  Episcopalian 
England,  the  rights  of  her  church,  in  worship,  disci- 

»  D'Oyley's  Life  of  Sancroft,  327,  520 ;  Burnet's  Own  Time,  ii. 
1033,  &c. ;  Kenhet's  Hist.,  iii.  483,  551,  et  seq. ;  Macaulay's  Hist., 
iii.  89,  468  —  495  ;  Bogne  and  Bennett's  Hist,,  i.  207. 

2  Scots  Acts,  1689,  c.  2;  1690,  c.  5;  1692,  c.  117. 

'  Macaulay's  Hist.,  iii.  708. 


Reigns  of  George  I.  and  II.  8 1 

pline,  and  government,  were  confirmed  and  declared 
unalterable.^ 

To  the  Catholics  of  Ireland,  the  reign  of  William 
was  made  terrible  by  new  rigours  and  op-  catholics 
pression.     They  were  in  arms  for  the  exiled  unde?^'^ 
king ;  and  again  was  their  faith  the  symbol  ^^^^^°^  ^^' 
of  rebellion.      Overcome  by  the  sword,  they  were 
condemned  to  proscription  and  outlawry. 

It  was  long  before  Catholics  were  to  enjoy  indul- 
gence. In  1711,  a  proclamation  was  pub-  cathoncs 
lished  for  enforcing  the  penal  laws  against  GeJ'^if  and 
them  in  England.^  And  in  Ireland,  the  ^^' 
severities  of  former  reigns  were  aggravated  by  Acts 
of  Queen  Anne.^  After  the  rebellion  of  1715,  Par- 
liament endeavoured  to  strengthen  the  Protestant 
interest,  by  enforcing  the  laws  against  Papists.-* 
Again,  in  1722,  the  estates  of  Eoman  Catholics  and 
non-jurors  were  made  to  bear  a  special  financial 
burden,  not  charged  upon  other  property.^  And, 
lastly,  the  rebellion  of  1745  called  forth  a  procla- 
mation, in  the  spirit  of  earlier  times,  offering  a  re- 
ward of  100^.  for  the  discovery  of  Jesuits  and  popish 
priests,  and  calling  upon  magistrates  to  bring  them 
to  justice. 

Much  of  the  toleration  which  had  been  conceded 
to  Protestant  nonconformists  at  the  Eevo-  Noncon- 
lution,  was   again   withdrawn  during  the  j2S?lnne, 
four  last  years  of  Queen  Anne.     Having  <^«<»-^-^"- 
found  their  way  into  many  offices,  by  taking  the 

*  Act  of  Union,  5  Anne,  c.  8  ;  Scots  Acts,  1705,  c.  4 ;  1706,  c.  7. 

*  Boyce's  Eeign  of  Queen  Anne,  429,  &c. 
»  2  Anne,  c.  3,  6 ;  8  Anne,  c.  3. 

*  1  Geo.  I.  c.  55.  5  9  Geo.  I.  c.  18 ;  Pari.  Hist.,  viii.  51,  353.- 

VOL.  III.  G 


82  Religious  Liberty. 

sacrament,  an  Act  was  passed,  in  1711,  against  occa- 
sional conformity,  by  which  dissenters  were  dis- 
possessed of  their  employments,  and  more  rigorously 
disqualified  in  future.^  Again  were  nonconformists 
repelled,  with  contumely,  from  honourable  fellowship 
with  the  state.  Two  years  afterwards  the  Schism 
Bill  was  passed,  prohibiting  the  exercise  of  the 
vocation  of  schoolmaster  or  private  teacher,  without 
a  declaration  of  conformity,  and  a  licence  from  a 
bishop.^  Both  these  statutes,  however,  were  re- 
pealed in  the  following  reign.^  With  the  reign  of 
George  11.  a  wider  toleration  was  commenced,  in 
another  form.  The  time  was  not  yet  come  for  re- 
pealing the  laws  imposing  civil  disabilities  upon 
dissenters :  but  annual  Acts  of  Indemnity  were 
passed,  by  which  persons  who  had  failed  to  qualify 
themselves  for  office,  were  protected.'* 

The  reign  of  George  III.  opened  imder  circum- 
state  of  the  staucos  favourablc  to  religious  liberty.  The 
SSSi'Jn  intolerant  spirit  of  the  high  chm-ch  party 
of  gSST°"  tad  been  broken  since  the  death  of  Anne. 
■^"*  The  phrensies  of  Sacheverell  and  Atterbury 

bad  yielded  to  the  liberal  philosophy  of  Milton  and 
Locke,  of  Jeremy  Taylor,  Hoadley,  Warburton,  and 
Montesquieu.  The  angry  disputations  of  convoca- 
tion were  silenced.  The  church  was  at  peace ;  and 
the   state   had   ceased   to   distrust    either    Eoman 

*  10  Anne,  c.  2 ;  Burnet's  Own  Time,  ii.  364,  585,  &c.;  Bogueand 
Bennett's  Hist.,  i.  228,  262. 

2  "12  Anne,  c.  7;  Pari.  Hist,  vi.  1349  ;  Bogue  and  Bennett's  Hist., 
268. 

2  5  Geo.  I.  c.  4. 

*  The  first  of  these  Acts  was  in  1727 ;  1  Geo.  II.  c.  23.  Hallam's 
Const.  Hist.,  ii.  412. 


t 


State  of  Religion  in  1760.  %2i 

Catholics  or  nonconformists.  Never  since  the  Ee- 
formation,  had  any  monarch  succeeded  to  the  throne, 
at  a  period  so  free  from  religious  discords  and  em- 
barrassments. In  former  reigns,  high  churchmen 
had  been  tainted  with  Jacobite  sympathies :  now  all 
parties  vied  in  attachment  and  loyalty.  Once  more 
the  church  was  wholly  with  the  king  :  and  added  all 
her  weight  to  the  influence  of  the  crown.  Many 
English  Catholics,  crushed  by  persecution,  and  losing- 
hopes  of  the  restoration  of  their  own  faith,  had 
gradually  conformed  to  a  church,  already  beginning 
to  boast  a  certain  antiquity, — enshrined  in  the  an- 
cient temples  of  their  forefathers, — respecting  their 
traditions, — allied  to  the  state, — and  enjoying  the 
power,  wealth,  fashion,  and  popularity  of  a  national 
establishment.  Some  of  this  body  had  been  impli- 
cated in  both  the  Jacobite  rebellions :  but  their 
numbers  had  ceased  to  be  formidable ;  and  they  were 
now  universally  well-disposed  and  loyal.*  The  dis- 
senters had  been  uniformly  attached  to  the  House 
of  Hanover ;  and,  having  ceased  to  be  oppressed, 
quietly  prospered,  without  offence  to  the  churcji. 
The  old  nonconformist  bodies, — the  offspring  of  the 
Eeformation,  and  the  Act  of  Uniformity, — so  far 
from  making  progress,  had  declined  in  numbers  and 
activity,  since  the  time  of  William  III.^     There  had 

*  In  1767,  there  appear  to  hare  been  no  more  than  67,916 ;  and,  in 
1780,  69,376.  They  had  200  chapeis.— Census,  1851:  Eeport  on 
Eeligious  Worship,  ci.  In  1696,  out  of  2,599,786  freeholders  in 
I^ngland  and  "Wales,  there  had  been  13,856  Catholics. — Ibid.,  c. 
Dalrymple,  hook  i.  part  ii.  App. ;  Butler's  Historical  Mem.  of  the 
Catholics,  iii.  162. 

2  Calamy's  Life  and  Times,  ii.  529  ;  Lord  Mahon's  Hist.,  ii.  372  ; 
Bogue  and  Bennett's  Hist.,  iii.  314-324.     In  1696  it  appeared  that 

G  2 


84  Religious  Liberty. 

been  little  religious  zeal,  either  within  or  without 
the  church.  It  was  an  age  of  spiritual  indifference 
and  lethargy.^  With  many  noble  exceptions,  the 
clergy  had  been  inert  and  apathetic.  A  benefice  was 
regarded  as  an  estate,  to  which  was  attached  the 
performance  of  certain  ecclesiastical  duties.  These 
once  performed, — the  service  read,  the  weekly  ser- 
mon preached,  the  child  christened,  the  parishioner 
buried, — and  the  parson  differed  little  from  the 
squire.  He  was  generally  charitable,  kindly,  moral, 
and  well  educated — according  to  the  standard  of  the 
age, — in  all  but  theology.^  But  his  spiritual  calling 
sat  lightly  upon  him.  Zealous  for  church  and  king, 
and  honestly  hating  dissenters,  he  was  unconscious 
of  a  mission  to  spread  the  knowledge  of  the  gospel 
among  the  people,  to  solve  their  doubts,  to  satisfy 
their  spiritual  longings,  and  to  attach  their  religious 
sympathies  to  the  church.^  The  nonconformist 
ministers,  comfortably  established  among  their  flocks, 

108,676  freeholders  in  England  and  Wales  were  nonconformists 
(Census  Eeport,  1851,  c);  but  as  dissent  chiefly  prevailed  in  the 
tovms,  this  report  must  have  fallen  very  far  short  of  the  total 
numbers. 

»  Bishop  G-ibson's  Pastoral  Letters,  2nd  Ed.,  1728,  p.  2 ;  Butler's 
advertisement  to  Analogy  of  Eevealed  Keligion,  1736;  Archbishop 
Seeker's  Eight  Charges,  1738,  p.  4 ;  Southey's  Life  of  Wesley,  i. 
324,  &c. 

2  Bishop  Burnet  thus  speaks  of  candidates  for  ordination: — 
'  Those  who  have  read  some  few  books,  yet  never  seem  to  have  read 
the  scriptures.'  '  The  case  is  not  much  better  in  many,  who,  having 
got  into  orders,  come  for  instruction  and  cannot  make  it  appear  that 
they  have  read  the  scriptures,  or  anyone  good  book,  since  they  were 
ordained.' — Pastoral  Care,  3rd  Ed.,  1713:  Preface. 

^  '  A  remiss,  unthinking  course  of  life,  with  little  or  no  application 
to  study,  and  the  bare  performing  of  that,  which,  if  not  done,  would 
draw  censures  when  complained  of,  without  even  pursuing  the  pasto- 
ral care  in  any  suitable  degree,  is  but  too  common,  as  well  as  too 
evident.' — Ibid.    See  also  Intr.  to  last  volume  of  Burnet's  Hist. 


Wesley  and  Whitefield.  85 

and  enjoying  their  modest  temporalities,  shared  the 
spiritual  ease  of  churchmen.  They  were  ruffled  by 
no  sectarian  zeal,  or  restless  spirit  of  encroachment. 
Many  even  conformed  to  the  Church  of  England. 
The  age  was  not  congenial  to  religious  excitement 
and  enthusiasm ;  a  lull  had  succeeded  to  storms  and 
agitations. 

But  this  religious  calm  liad  lately  been  disturbed 
by  Wesley  and  Whitefield,  the  apostles  of  ^^y^^^^^ 
modern  dissent.  These  eminent  men  were  w^i^^fieM. 
both  brought  up  as  faithful  disciples  of  the  church, 
and  admitted  to  holy  orders.  Not  impelled  to  their 
extraordinary  mission  by  any  repugnance  to  her  doc- 
trines and  discipline,  they  went  forth  to  rouse  the 
people  from  their  religious  apathy,  and  awaken  them 
to  a  sense  of  sin.  They  penetrated  the  haunts  of 
ignorance  and  vice ;  and  braved  ridicule,  insults,  and 
violence.  They  preached  in  the  open  air,  to  multi- 
tudes who  had  scarcely  heard  of  the  gospel.  On  the 
hill-side, — by  ruins, — on  the  sea-shore,  they  appealed 
to  the  imagination  as  well  as  to  the  devotional  senti- 
ments of  their  hearers.  They  devoted  their  lives  to 
the  spiritual  instruction  of  the  middle  and  lower 
classes :  preached  to  them  everywhere  :  prayed  with 
them  :  read  the  scriptures  in  public  and  private  ; 
and  addressed  them  with  familiar  speech  and  homely 
illustration.^     Wesley,  still  in  communion  with  the 

*  *  I  design  plain  truth  for  plain  people  ;  therefore,  of  set  purpose 
I  abstain  from  all  nice  and  philosophical  speculations,  from  all  per- 
plexed and  intricate  reasonings;  and,  as  far  as  possible,  from  even 
the  show  of  learning,  unless  in  sometimes  citing  the  original  scrip- 
tures. I  labour  to  avoid  all  words  which  are  not  easy  to  be  under- 
stood,— all  which  are  not  used  in  common  life,  and  in  particular 


S6  Religious  Liberty. 

church,  and  holding  her  in  love  and  reverence,  be- 
came the  founder  of  a  new  sect.^  He  preached  to 
reclaim  men  from  sin :  he  addressed  the  neglected 
heathens  of  society,  whom  the  church  knew  not :  he 
laboured  as  a  missionary,  not  as  a  sectarian.  Schism 
grew  out  of  his  pious  zeal :  but  his  followers,  like 
their  revered  founder,  have  seldom  raised  their 
voices,  in  the  spirit  of  schismatics,  against  their 
parent  church.^  Whitefield,  for  a  time  the  fellow- 
labourer  of  Wesley,  surpassed  that  great  man  as  a 
preacher ;  and  moved  the  feelings  and  devotion  of 
his  hearers  with  the  inspiration  of  a  prophet :  but, 
less  gifted  with  powers  of  organisation  and  govern- 
ment, he  left  fewer  monuments  of  his  labours,  as  the 
founder  of  a  religious  sect.^  Holding  to  the  doctrine 
of  absolute  predestination,  he  became  the  leader  of 
the  Calvinistic  Methodists,  and  Lady  Huntingdon's 
connection."*  The  Methodists  were  regarded  by 
churchmen  as  fanatical  enthusiasts  rather  than  dis- 
senters ;  while  their  close  relations  with  the  church 
repelled  the  favour  of  other  sects.      They  suffered 

those  kinds  of  teelinical  terms  that  so  frequently  occur  in  bodies  of 
divinity.' — Wesley's  Pref.  to  Sermons,  1746. — In  another  place  Wes- 
ley wrote :  '  I  dare  no  more  wite  in  a  fine  style,  than  wear  a  fine' 
coa.t.' ^-Pref.  to  2nd  Ser.  of  Sermons,  1788. 

1  Eev.  J.  Wesley's  Works,  i.  185 ;  ii.  515  ;  vii.  422-3 ;  viii.  Ill, 
254,  269,  311  ;  Southey's  Life  of  Wesley,  eh.  xii.,  xx.,  &c. 

-  Wesley's  Works,  viii.  205,  321 ;  Centenary  of  Wesleyan  Metho- 
dism, 1 83 ;  Lord  Mahon's  Hist.,  ii.  365-366.  Wesley  himself  said : 
'  We  are  not  seceders  ;  nor  do  we  bear  any  resemblance  to  them : ' 
and  after  his  sect  had  spread  itself  over  the  land,  he  continually 
preached  in  the  churches  of  the  establishment. 

^  Dr.  Adam  Clarke's  Works,  xiii.  257  ;  Southey's  Life  of  Wesley, 
ch.  xxi. 

*  Wesley's  Works,  iii.  84 ;  Philip's  Life  of  Whitefield,  195,  &c. ; 
Southey's  Life  of  Wesley,  ch.  xxv. ;  Life  of  Countess  of  Huntingdon, 
8vo.  1840. 


Revival  of  Dissent,  87 

ridicule,  but  enjoyed  toleration  ;  and,  labouring  in  a 
new  field,  attracted  multitudes  to  their  communion.* 

The  revival  of  the  religious  spirit  by  the  Metho- 
dists gradually  stimulated  the  older  sects  j^^^^i  of 
of  nonconformists.  Presbyterians,  Inde-  '^^^^*^- 
pendents,  and  Baptists,  awakened  by  Wesley  and 
Whitefield  to  a  sense  of  the  spiritual  wants  of  the 
people,  strove,  with  all  their  energies,  to  meet  them. 
And  large  numbers,  whose  spiritual  care  had  hitherto 
been  neglected  alike  by  the  church  and  by  noncon- 
formists, were  steadily  swelling  the  ranks  of  dissent. 
The  church  caught  the  same  spirit  more  slowly. 
She  was  not  alive  to  the  causes  which  were  under- 
mining her  influence,  and  invading  her  proper 
domain, — the  religious  teaching  of  the  people, — 
until  chapels  and  meeting  houses  had  been  erected 
in  half  the  parishes  of  England.^ 

The  church  of  Scotland,  which  in  former  reigns  had 
often  been  a  tissue  with  the  civil  power,  had  ^^^^  ^j 
now  fallen  under  the  rule  of  the  moderate  ^0*^^ 
party,  and  was  as  tractable  as  the  church  of  England 
herself.  She  had  ever  been  faithful  to  the  Revolution 
settlement,  by  which  her  own  privileges  were  assured  ; 
and,  when  free  from  persecution,  had  cast  off  much 
of  her  former  puritanism.  Her  spirit  had  been 
tempered  by  learning,  cultivation,  society,  and  the 
gentle  influences  of  the  South,  until  she  had  become 
a  stanch  ally  of  the  crown  and  aristocracy.^ 

^  Southey's  Life  of  "Wesley,  ch.  xxix. ;  Watson's  Observations  on 
Sonthey's  Life,  1 38 ;  Lord  Mahon's  Chapter  on  Methodism,  Hist.,  ii. 
354 ;  Brook's  Hist,  of  Kelig.  Lib.,  ii.  326-333. 

2  See  infra,  p.  222. 

^  Cimningliam's  Church  Hist,  of  Scotland,  ii.  491,  578,  &c. 


88  Religious  Liberty. 

In  Ireland,  the  Protestant  chm-cli  had  made  no 
Church  of  pi'ogress  since  the  days  of  Elizabeth. 
Ireland.        rpj^^   j^^^gg    ^f    ^^   population   wero   still 

Catholics.  The  clergy  of  the  state  church,  indif- 
ferent and  supine,  read  the  English  liturgy  in 
empty  churches,  while  their  parishioners  attended 
mass  in  the  Catholic  chapels.  Irish  benefices 
afforded  convenient  patronage  to  the  crown,  and 
the  great  families.  The  Irish  church  was  a  good 
rallying  point  for  Protestant  ascendency;  but  in- 
stead of  fulfilling  the  mission  of  a  national  estab- 
lishment, it  provoked  religious  animosity  and  civil 
dissensions.  For  the  present,  however,  Protestant 
rule  was  absolute  ;  and  the  subjection  of  the  Catho- 
lics undisturbed.^ 

Such  being  the  state  of  the  church,  and  other  re- 
Graduai  re-  ligious  bodics,  the  gradual  relaxation  of  the 
the  penal      penal  codc  was,  at  length,  to  be  commenced. 

code  com-  .  i         ■, 

menced.  This  codc,  the  growth  of  more  than  two 
centuries,  was  wholly  inconsistent  with  the  policy 
of  a  free  state.  Liberty  of  thought  and  discussion 
was  allowed  to  be  a  constitutional  right :  but  free- 
dom of  conscience  was  interdicted.  Eeligious  unity 
was  still  assumed,  while  dissent  was  notorious. 
Conformity  with  the  state  church  was  held  to  be 
a  duty,  the  neglect  of  which  was  punishable  with 
penalties  and  disabilities.  Freedom  of  worship  and 
civil  rights  were  denied  to  all  but  members  of  the 
church.     This  policy,  originating  in  the  doctrines 


*  Bishop  Berkeley'fs  Works,  ii.  381  ;  Wesley's  Works,  x.  209,  &c. ; 
Mant's  Hist,  of  the  Church  of  Ireland,  ii.  288-294,  421-429,  &c.; 
Lord  Mahon's  Hist.  ii.  374. 


I 

I 


The  Penal  Code.  89 

of  a  churcli  pretending  to  infallibility,  and  admitted 
into  our  laws  in  the  plenitude  of  civil  and  ecclesias- 
tical power,  grew  up  amid  rebellions  and  civil  wars, 
in  wMch  religion  became  the  badge  of  contending 
parties.  Religious  intolerance  was  its  foundation  : 
political  expediency  its  occasional  justification. 
Long  after  the  state  had  ceased  to  be  threatened 
by  any  religious  sect,  the  same  policy  was  main- 
tained on  a  new  ground, — the  security  of  the  estab- 
lished church. 

The  penal  code,  with  all  its  anomalies  and  incon- 
sistencies, admitted  of  a  simple  division.  General 
One  part  imposed  restraints  on  religious  theSn*^!"^^ 
worship:  the  other  attached  civil  disabili-  ^^^^' 
ties  to  faith  and  doctrine.  The  former  was  naturally 
the  first  to  be  reviewed.  More  repugnant  to  religious 
liberty,  and  more  generally  condemned  by  the  en- 
lightened thinkers  of  the  age,  it  was  not  to  be 
defended  by  those  political  considerations  which 
were  associated  with  the  latter.  Men,  earnest  in 
upholding  securities  to  our  Protestant  constitution, 
revolted  from  the  persecution  of  conscience.  These 
two  divisions,  however,  were  so  intermixed  in  the 
tangled  web  of  legislation :  principles  had  been  so 
little  observed  in  carrying  out  the  capricious  and 
impulsive  policy  of  intolerance ;  and  the  temper  of 
Parliament  and  the  country  was  still  so  unsettled 
in  regard  to  the  doctrines  of  religious  liberty,  that 
the  labour  of  revision  proceeded  with  no  more 
system  than  the  original  code.  Now  a  penalty 
affecting  religion  was  repealed;  now  a  civil  dis- 
ability removed.     Sometimes  Catholics  received  in- 


90  ReligioiLs  Liberty. 

dulgence  ;  and  sometimes  a  particular  sect  of  non- 
conformists. First  one  grievance  was  redressed, 
and  then  another :  but  Parliament  continued  to 
shrink  from  the  broad  assertion  of  religious  liberty, 
as  the  right  of  British  subjects,  and  the  policy  of 
the  state.  Toleration  and  connivance  at  dissent, 
had  already  succeeded  to  active  persecution  :  society 
had  outgrown  the  law :  but  a  century  of  strife  and 
agitation  had  yet  to  pass,  before  the  penal  code  was 
blotted  out,  and  religious  liberty  established.  We 
have  now  to  follow  this  great  cause  through  its 
lengthened  annals,  and  to  trace  its  halting  and  un- 
steady progress. 

Early  in  this  reign,  the  broad  principles  of  tole- 
corporation  ^^^^^^  ^^^^  judicially  affirmed  by  the 
and  ?hf '^  House  of  Lords.  The  city  of  London  had 
F^fsrd"'  perverted  the  Corporation  Act  into  an 
■^^*^^*  instrument  of  extortion,  by  electing  dis- 

senters to  the  office  of  sheriff,  and  exacting  fines 
when  they  refused  to  qualify.  No  less  than  15,000^. 
had  thus  been  levied  before  the  dissenters  resisted 
this  imposition.  The  law  had  made  them  ineligible : 
then  how  could  they  be  fined  for  not  serving  ?  The 
City  Courts  upheld  the  claims  of  the  Corporation : 
but  the  dissenters  appealed  to  the  Court  of  Judges 
or  commissioners'  delegates,  and  obtained  a  judg- ' 
ment  in  their  favour.  In  1759,  the  Corporation 
brought  the  cause  before  the  House  of  Lords,  on  a 
writ  of  error.  The  judges  being  consulted,  only 
one  could  be  found  to  support  the  claims  of  the 
Corporation ;  and  the  House  of  Lords  unanimously 
affirmed  the  judgment   of  the    Court   below.      In 


t 


Toleratio7t  recognised.  91 

moving  the  judgment  of  the  House,  Lord  Mansfield 
thus  defined  the  legal  rights  of  dissenters : — '  It  is 
now  no  crime,'  he  said,  '  for  a  man  to  say  he  is  a 
dissenter ;  nor  is  it  any  crime  for  him  not  to  take 
the  sacrament  according  to  the  rites  of  the  Churcli 
of  England :  nay,  the  crime  is  if  he  does  it,  contrary 
to  the  dictates  of  his  conscience.'  And  again: — 
'  The  Toleration  Act  renders  that  which  was  illegal 
before,  now  legal ;  the  dissenters'  way  of  worship  is 
permitted  and  allowed  by  this  Act.  It  is  not  only 
exempted  from  punishment,  but  rendered  innocent 
and  lawful ;  it  is  established ;  it  is  put  under  the 
protection,  and  is  not  merely  under  the  connivance, 
of  the  law.'  And  in  condemning  the  laws  to  force 
conscience,  he  said: — 'There  is  nothing  certainly 
more  unreasonable,  more  inconsistent  with  the  rights 
of  human  nature,  more  contrary  to  the  spirit  and 
precepts  of  the  Christian  religion,  more  iniquitous 
and  unjust,  more  impolitic,  than  persecution.  It  is 
against  natural  religion,  revealed  religion,  and  soimd 
policy.'  ^  In  his  views  of  toleration,  the  judge  was 
in  advance  of  the  legislature. 

Several  years  elapsed  before  Parliament  was 
invited  to  consider  matters  affecting  the  subscription 
church  and  dissenters.  In  1772,  Sir  ^eb??Sf' '' 
William  Meredith  presented  a  petition  ^"^• 
from  several  clergymen  and  others,  complaining 
that  subscription  to  the  thirty-nine  articles  was 
required  of  the  clergy,  and  at  the  universities.     So 

*  Pari.  Hist.,  xvi.  316. — Horace  "Walpole  unjustly  sneers  at  this 
speech  as  'another  Whig  oration'  of  Lord  Mansfield's.— 3/gw.,  ii. 
414.  Lord  Campbell's  Chief  Justices,  ii.  612.  Brook's  Hist,  of 
Belig.  Lib.,  ii.  432. 


92  Religious  Liberty. 

far  as  this  complaint  concerned  the  clergy,  it  was  a 
question  of  comprehension  and  church  discipline ; 
but  subscription  on  matriculation  affected  the  ad- 
mission of  dissenters  to  the  University  of  Oxford ; 
and  subscription  on  taking  the  degrees  of  Doctor  of 
Laws  and  Doctor  of  Medicine  excluded  dissenters 
from  the  practice  of  the  civil  law,  as  advocates,  and 
the  practice  of  medicine,  as  physicians.  In  debate 
this  complaint  was  treated  chiefly  as  a  question 
affecting  the  discipline  of  the  church  and  universi- 
ties :  but  sentiments  were  expressed  that  marked  a 
growing  spirit  of  toleration.  It  being  objected  that 
if  subscription  were  relaxed,  sectaries  might  gain 
admission  to  the  church,  Sir  Gr.  Savile  said  finely, 
'sectaries.  Sir!  had  it  not  been  for  sectaries,  this 
cause  had  been  tried  at  Kome.  Thank  God,  it 
is  tried  here.'  The  motion  for  bringing  up  the  pe- 
tition found  no  more  than  seventy-one  supporters.^ 
The  University  of  Cambridge,  however,  made  a  con- 
cession to  the  complaints  of  these  petitioners,  by 
admitting  bachelors  of  arts,  on  subscribing  a  decla- 
ration that  they  were  hond  fide  members  of  the 
Church  of  England,  instead  of  requiring  their  sub- 
scription to  the  thirty-nine  articles.^  Sir  W.  Mere- 
dith renewed  the  discussion  in  the  two  following 
years,  but  found  little  encouragement. ^ 

In  1772,  Sir  H.  Hoghton  brought  in  a  bill,  Avith 

J  Ayes,  71  ;  Noes,  217.     Pari.  Hist.,  xvii.  245  ;  Clarke,  iii.  261  ; 
Brook's  Hist,  of  Kelig.  Lib.,  ii.  365.     Walpole's  Journal,  i.  7. 

2  Hughes'  Hist.,  ii.  56. 

3  Feb.  23rd,  1773;  May  Sth,  1774;  Pari.  Hist.,  xvii.  742,  1326; 
Fox's  Mem.,  i.  92. 


Stcbscription  by  Dissenters,  93 

little  opposition,  for  relieving  dissenting  ministers 
and   schoolmasters   from   the*  subscription  Subscription 

.  i         1     T^  ^^  dissenting 

required  by  the  Toleration  Act.'   Dissenters  ministers 

^  ''  and  school- 

conceived  it  to  be  a  just  matter  of  com-  masters, 

•^  _  April  3rd, 

plaint  that  the  law  should  recognise  such  a  ^^^2- 
test,  after  dissent  had  been  acknowledged  to  be  law- 
ful. No  longer  satisfied  with  connivance  at  a  breach 
of  the  law,  they  prayed  for  honourable  immunity. 
Their  representations  were  felt  to  be  so  reasonable  by 
the  Commons,  that  the  bill  was  passed  with  little 
opposition.  In  the  Lords  it  was  warmly  supported 
by  Lord  Chatham,'^  the  Duke  of  Eichmond,  Lord 
Camden,  and  Lord  Mansfield :  but  was  lost  on  the 
second  reading  by  a  majority  of  seventy-three.^ 

In  the  next  year.  Sir  H.  Hoghton  introduced  an 
amended  measm-e,  and  passed  it  through  Feb.iith 
all  its  stages,  in  the  Commons,  by  large  ^^^^• 
majorities.  Arguments  were  still  heard  that  con- 
nivance was  all  that  dissenters  could  expect;  in 
reply  to  which,  Mr.  Burke  exclaimed,  '  What,  Sir,  is 
liberty  by  connivance  but  a  temporary  relaxation  of 
slavery  ? '  In  the  Lords,  the  bill  met  with  the  same 
fate  as  in  the  previous  year.'* 

>  The  34tli,  35th,  36th,  and  part  of  the  20th  articles  had  been 
excepted  by  the  Toleration  Act,  as  expressing  the  distinctive  doctrines 
of  the  church. 

2  See  outline  of  his  speech,  Chatham  Corr.,  iv.  219. 

3  Contents,  29;  Non-contents,  102.  Pari.  Hist.,  xvii.  431-446. 
Walpole's  Journal,  i.  93. 

"  Ibid.,  759-791.  With  reference  to  this  bill  Lord  Chatham 
wrote  :  '  I  hear,  in  the  debate  on  the  dissenters,  the  ministry  avowed 
enslaving  them,  and  to  keep  the  cruel  penal  laws,  like  bloodhounds 
coupled  up,  to  be  let  loose  on  the  heels  of  these  poor  conscientious 
men,  when  government  pleases ;  i.  e.  if  they  dare  to  dislike  some 
ruinous  measure,  or  to  disobey  orders  at  an  election.  Forty  years 
ago,  if  any  minister  had  avowed  such  a  doctrine,  the  Tower!  the 


94  Religious  Liberty. 

In  1779,  however,  Sir  Henry  Hoghton  at  length 
Dissenting  succeeded  in*  passing  his  measure.  Dissen- 
Act,  1779.  ters  were  enabled  to  preach  and  to  act  as 
schoolmasters,  without  subscribing  any  of  the  thirty- 
nine  articles.  No  other  subscription  was  proposed 
to  be  substituted :  but,  on  the  motion  of  Lord  North, 
a  declaration  was  required  to  be  made,  that  the  per- 
son taking  it  was  a  Christian  and  a  Protestant  dis- 
senter ;  and  that  he  took  the  scriptures  for  the  rule 
of  his  faith  and  practice.  Except  upon  the  question 
of  this  declaration,  the  Bill  passed  through  both 
Houses,  with  little  opposition.* 

In  Ireland,  a  much  greater  advance  was  made, 
Dissenters  at  this  time,  in  the  principles  of  tole- 
to  offices       ration.      An   Act   was    passed    admitting: 

in  Ireland,  i  i         i  c^ 

1779.  Protestants  to  civil  and  military  offices  who 

had  not  taken  the  sacrament, — a  measure  nearly 
fifty  years  in  advance  of  the  policy  of  the  British 
Parliament.^  It  must,  however,  be  confessed  that 
the  dissenters  owed  this  concession  less  to  an  en- 
lightened toleration  of  their  religion,  than  to  the 
necessity  of  uniting  all  classes  of  Protestants  in  the 
cause  of  Protestant  ascendency. 

At  this  period,  the  penal  laws  affecting  Eoman 
Prevalent  Catholics  also  camc  under  review.  By  the 
coicSfing  government,  the  English  Catholics  were  no 
Catholics,  longer  regarded  with  political  distrust. 
The  memory  of  Jacobite  troubles  had  nearly  passed 

Tower !  would  have  echoed  round  the  benches  of  the  House  of 
Lords  ;  hM.tfxiit  ILium,  the  whole  constitution  is  a  shadow.' — Letter 
to  Lord  Shelburne,  April  14th,  1773  ;  Chatham  Corr.,  iv.  259. 

»  Pari.  Hist.,  xx.  239,  306-322.  See  19  Geo.  III.  c.  44;  Clarke, 
iii.  269,  355  ;  Brook's  Hist,  cf  Eelig.  Lib.,  ii.  369. 

2  19  &  20  Geo.  III.  c.  6  (Ireland). 


Relief  of  Catholics y  1778.  95 

away ;  and  the  Catholics  of  this  generation  were  not 
suspected  of  disloyalty.  Inconsiderable  in  numbers, 
and  in  influence,  they  threatened  no  danger  to 
church  or  state.  Their  religion,  however,  was  still 
held  in  aversion  by  the  great  body  of  the  people ; 
and  they  received  little  favoUr  from  any  political 
party.  With  the  exception  of  Fox,  Burke,  and  Sir 
Gr.  Savile,  few  of  the  Whigs  felt  any  sympathy  for 
their  grievances.  The  Whigs  were  a  party  strongly 
influenced  by  traditions  and  hereditary  sympathies. 
In  struggling  for  civil  and  religious  liberty  at  the 
Revolution,  they  had  been  leagued  with  the  Puritans 
against  the  Papists :  in  maintaining  the  House  of 
Hanover  and  the  Protestant  succession,  they  had 
still  been  in  alliance  with  the  church  and  dissenters, 
and  in  opposition  to  Catholics.  Toleration  to  the 
Catholics,  therefore,  formed  no  part  of  the  tradi- 
tional creed  of  the  Whig  party.  ^  Still  less  indulg- 
ence, was  to  be  expected  from  the  Tories,  whose 
sympathies  were  wholly  with  the  church.  Believing 
penal  laws  to  be  necessary  to  her  interests,  they 
supported  them,  indifferently,  against  dissenters  and 
Catholics.  But  the  growing  enlightenment  of  the 
time  made  the  more  reflecting  statesmen,  of  all 
parties,  revolt  against  some  of  the  penal  laws  still  in 
force  against  the  Catholics.  They  had  generally 
been  suffered  to  sleep :  but  could,  at  any  time,  be 
revived  by  the  bigotry  of  zealots,  or  the  cupidity  of 
relatives  and  informers.  Several  priests  had  been 
prosecuted  for  saying  mass.     Mr.  Maloney,  a  priest, 

'  Fox's  Mem.,'i.  176,  203-4;  Eockingham  Memoirs,  i.  228;  Ma- 
caulay's  Hist.,  iv.  118. 


g6  Reli^ous  Liberty. 

having  been  informed  against,  was  unavoidably  con- 
demned to  perpetual  imprisonment.  The  govern- 
ment were  shocked  at  this  startling  illustration  of 
the  law  •,  and  the  king  being  afraid  to  grant  a 
pardon,  they  ventured,  on  their  own  responsibility, 
to  give  the  unfortunate  priest  his  liberty.'  Another 
priest  owed  his  acquittal  to  the  ingenuity  and  toler- 
ant spirit  of  Lord  Mansfield.^  In  many  cases, 
Eoman  Catholics  had  escaped  the  penalties  of  the 
law,  by  bribing  informers  not  to  enforce  them.^ 
Lord  Camden  had  protected  a  Catholic  lady  from 
spoliation,  under  the  law,  by  a  private  Act  of 
Parliament.'* 

To  avert  such  scandals  as  these,  and  to  redeem 
Roman  ^^  ^^^  from  the  reproach  of  intolerance, 
Reifrf^Act,  Sir  G-eorge  Savile,  in  1778,  proposed  a 
^^^^'  measure  of   relief  for  English  Catholics. 

Its  introduction  was  preceded  by  a  loyal  address  to 
the  king,  signed  by  ten  Catholic  Lords  and  one 
hundred  and  sixty-three  Commoners,  giving  assur- 
ance of  their  affection  for  His  Majesty,  and  attach- 
ment to  the  civil  constitution  of  the  country ;  and 
expressing  sentiments  calculated  to  conciliate  the 
favour  of  Parliament  and  ministers.  When  it  was 
explained  that  the  penalties,  imposed  in  1700,  and 
now  to  be  repealed,  were  the  perpetual  imprison- 
noient  of  priests  for  officiating  in  the  services  of  their 
church, — the  forfeiture  of  the  estates   of   Eoman 

»  Lord  Shelbnrne's  Speech,  May  25th,  1773;  P-arl.  Hist.,  xix. 
1145 ;  Butler's  Hist.  Mem.,  iii.  276l 

2  HolL,  176  ;  Lord  Campbell's  Chief  Justices,  ii.  514, 

3  Pari.  Hist.,  xix.  1137-1145. 

4  Butler's  Hist.  Mem.,  iii.  284.     Burke's  Works,  iii.  389. 


A 7iti- Catholic  Bigotry,  1778-1780.      97 

Catholic  heirs,  educated  abroad,  in  favour  of  the  " 
next  Protestant  heir, — and  the  prohibition  to  acquire 
land  by  purchase,^ — the  bill  was  allowed  to  be  in- 
troduced without  a  dissentient  voice ;  and  was  after- 
wards passed  through  both  Houses,  with  general 
approbation.^  Such  was  the  change  in  the  feelings 
of  the  legislature,  since  the  beginning  of  the 
century ! 

But  in  its  views  of  religious  liberty,  Parliament 
was  far  in  advance  of  considerable  classes  mots  in 

,    .  Scotland, 

of  the  people.  The  fanaticism  of  the  i778. 
puritans  was  not  yet  extinct.  Any  favour  extended 
to  Roman  Catholics,  however  just  and  moderate, 
aroused  its  latent  flames.  This  bill  extended  to 
England  only.  The  laws  of  Scotland  relating  to 
Roman  Catholics,  having  been  passed  before  its 
union  with  England,  required  further  consideration, 
and  a  different  form  of  treatment.  The  lord 
advocate  had,  therefore,  promised  to  introduce  a 
similar  measure,  applicable  to  Scotland,  in  the 
ensuing  session.  But  in  the  meantime,  the  violent 
fanatics  of  a  country  which  had  nothing  to  fear  from 
Catholics,  were  alarmed  at  the  projected  measure. 
They  had  vainly  endeavom'ed  to  oppose  the  English 
bill,  and  were  now  resolved  that,  at  least,  no  relief 
should  be  granted  to  their  own  fellow-countrymen. 
They  banded  together  in  'Protestant  Associations;'^ 
and  by  inflammatory  language  incited  the  people 
to   dangerous   outrages.     In   Edinburgh,   the   mob 

1  11  &  12  Will.  III.  c.  4. 

2  Pari.  Hist.,  xix.  1137-11-10;  18  Geo.  III.  c.  60;  Butler's  Hist, 
Mem.,  iii.  286-297. 

3  i^uiira.  Vol.  II.  p.  272. 

VOL.  III.  H 


98  Religious  Liberty. 

destroyed  two  Eoman  Catholic  chapels,  and  several 
houses  of  reputed  Papists.  In  Grlasgow,  there  were 
no  chapels  to  destroy :  but  the  mob  were  able  to 
show  their  zeal  for  religion,  by  sacking  the  factory  of 
a  Papist.  The  Eoman  Catholics  trembled  for  their 
property  and  their  lives.  Few  in  numbers,  they 
found  little  protection  from  Presbyterian  magis- 
trates ;  and  were  at  the  mercy  of  the  rioters.  Pre- 
ferring indemnity  for  their  losses,  and  immediate 
protection  for  their  persons,  to  a  prospective  relief 
from  penal  statutes,  they  concurred  with  the  govern- 
ment in  the  postponement  of  the  contemplated 
measure,  till  a  more  favourable  occasion.^  In  an 
March  18th  admirable  petition  to  the  House  of  Com- 
^^'^*  mons,  they  described  the  outrages  which 

had  been  committed  against  them,  and  expressed  their 
loyalty  and  attachment  to  the  constitution.  While 
they  readily  forbore  to  press  for  a  revision  of  the 
penal  statutes,  they  claimed  a  present  compensation 
for  the  damages  inflicted  upon  their  property.  Such 
compensation  was  at  once  promised  by  the  govern- 
ment.^ 

The  success  of  the  fanatical  rioters  in  Scotland, 
Riots  in  who  had  accomplished  an  easy  triumph 
1780.  '  over  the  Roman  Catholics  and  the  govern- 
ment, encouraged  the  anti-Catholic  bigotry  in  Eng- 
land. If  it  was  wrong  to  favour  Papists  in  Scotland, 
the  recent  English  Act  was  also  an  error,  of  which 
Parliament  must  now  repent.  The  fanatics  found  a 
congenial  leader  in  Lord  Greorge  Grordon ;  and  the 

»  March  15th,  1779  ;  Pari.  Hist.,  xx.  280  ;  Ann.  Eeg.,  1780,  p.  26. 
2  Pari.  Hist.,  xx.  322. 


Anti-Catholic  Bigotry,  1 778-1 780.       99 

metropolis  of  England  soon  exceeded  the  two  first 
cities  of  the  North  in  religious  zeal,  and  outrage. 
London  was  in  flanaes,  and  Parliament  invested  by 
the  mob,  because  some  penalties  against  Eoman 
Catholics,  condemned  by  sober  men  of  all  parties, 
had  lately  been  repealed.  The  insensate  cry  of  '  No 
Popery'  resounded  in  the  streets,  in  the  midst  of 
plunder,  and  the  torches  of  incendiaries.* 

Petitions  praying  for  the  repeal  of  the  recent  Act 
were  met  by  resolutions  of  the  House  of  Commons, 
vindicating  its  provisions  from  misrepresentation.^ 
One  unworthy  concession,  however,  was  made  to  the 
popular  excitement.  Sir  Greorge  Savile,  hitherto 
the  foremost  friend  of  toleration,  consented  to  in- 
troduce a  bill  to  restrain  Papists  from  teaching  the 
children  of  Protestants.  It  was  speedily  passed 
through  the  House  of  Commons.^  In  the  House  of 
Lords,  however,'  the  lord  chancellor  inserted  an 
amendment  limiting  the  bill  to  boarding-schools ; 
and  this  limitation  being  afterwards  opposed  by  the 
bishops,  led  to  the  loss  of  the  bill.'* 

For  several  years,  the  grievances  of  Catholics 
were  permitted  to  rest  in  oblivion  :  but  the  claims 
of  Protestant  dissenters  to  further  toleration  elicited 
ample  discussion. 

The  grievances  suffered  by  dissenters,  under  the 

*  See  sz{pra,Vol,  II.  p.  273. 

2  June  20th,  1780  ;  Pari.  Hist.,  xxi.  713. 

3  Pari.  Hist.,  xxi.  726. 

*  Ihid.,  754-766.  In  tins  year  (1780)  the  Earl  of  Surrey,  eldest 
eon  of  the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  and  Sir  Thomas  G-ascoigne,  abjured  the 
Eoman  Catholic  faith,  and  were  immediately  returned  to  Parliament. 
— ^Lord  Mahon's  Hist.,  vii.  111. 

H  2 


lOO  Religions  Liberty. 

Corporation  and  Test  Acts,  had  not  been  urged 
Corpora-  upon  Parliament  since  the  days  of  Sir 
TS'tAc'^ts,  Robert  Walpole:!  but  in  1787,  the  time 
^"^^*  seemed  favourable  for  obtaining  redress.   In 

Mr.  Pitt's  struggle  with  the  coalition,  the  dissenters 
having  sided  with  the  minister,  and  contributed  to 
his  electoral  triumphs,  expected  a  recognition  of 
their  services,  at  his  hands.^  Having  distributed 
a  printed  case,^  in  which  the  history  and  claims  of 
nonconformists  were  ably  stated,  they  entrusted 
Mr  Beau-  their  cause  to  Mr.  Beaufoy,  who  moved 
Sarch  28th";  ^^"^  ^  ^^11  ^^  repeal  the  Corporation  and 
1787.  rjigg^  Acts.     He  showed  how  the  patriotism 

of  a  nonconformist  soldier  might  be  rewarded  with 
jDenalties  and  proscription  ;  and  how  a  public-spirited 
merchant  would  be  excluded  froni  municipal  offices, 
in  the  city  which  his  enterprise  had  enriched,  unless 
lie  became  an  apostate  from  his  faith.  The  annual 
indemnity  acts  proved  the  inutility  of  penal  laws, 
while  they  failed  effectually  to  protect  dissenters. 
Members  were  admitted  to  both  Houses  of  Parlia- 
ment without  any  religious  test :  then  why  insist 
upon  the  orthodoxy  of  an  exciseman  ?  No  danger 
to  the  state  could  be  apprehended  from  the  admis- 
sion of  dissenters  to  office.  Who,  since  the  Eevolu- 
tion,  had  been  more  faithful  to  the  constitution  and 
monarchy  than  they?  Was  there  danger  to  the 
church?     The  church  was  in  no  danger  from  dis- 

'  Pari.  Hist.,  ix.  1046. 

=  Tomline's  Life  of  Pitt,  ii.  254  ;  Lord  Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt,  i. 
337,  &c. 

^  Case  of  the  Protestant  Dissenters,  with  reference  to  the  Test  and 
Corporation  Acts.— Pari.  Hist.,  xxvi.  780,  n. 


Corporation  and  Test  Acts,  1787.      loi 

senters  before  the  Test  Act :  the  church  of  Scotland 
was  in  no  danger  where  no  Test  Act  had  ever  existed: 
the  church  of  Ireland  was  in  no  danger  now,  though 
dissenters  had  for  the  last  seven  years  been  admitted 
to  office  in  that  country.^  But  danger  was  to  be 
apprehended  from  oppressive  laws  which  united 
different  bodies  of  dissenters,  otherwise  hostile,  in  a 
common  resentment  to  the  church.  Howard,  the 
philanthropist,  in  serving  his  country,  had  braved 
the  penalties  of  an  outlaw,  which  any  informer 
might  enforce.  Even  members  of  the  church  of 
Scotland  were  disqualified  for  office  in  England. 
Belonging  to  the  state  church,  they  were  treated  as 
dissenters.  In  conclusion,  he  condemned  the  profa- 
nation of  the  holy  sacrament  itself :  that  rite  should 
be  administered  to  none  unworthy  to  receive  it ;  yet 
it  had  become  the  common  test  of  fitness  for  secular 
employments.  Such  was  the  case  presented  in 
favour  of  dissenters.  Mr.  Beaufoy  was  not  in  the 
first  rank  of  debaters,  yet  from  the  force  of  truth 
and  a  good  cause,  his  admirable  speech  puts  to 
shame  the  arguments  with  which  the  first  statesmen 
of  the  day  then  ventured  to  oppose  him. 

Lord  North  regarded  the  Test  Act  as  '  the  great 
bulwark  of  the  constitution,  to  which  we  owed  the 
inestimable  blessings  of  freedom,  which  we  now  hap- 
pily enjoyed.'  He  contended  that  the  exclusion  of 
dissenters  from  office  was  still  as  necessary  as  when 
it  was  first  imposed  by  the  legislature  ;  and  denied 
that  it  involved  the  least  contradiction  to  the  prin- 
ciples  of   toleration.     The   state   had    allowed    all 

*  Sicpra,  Vol.  III.  p.  94. 


I02  Religious  Liberty, 

persons  to  follow  their  own  religion  freely:  but 
might  decline  to  employ  them  unless  they  belonged 
to  the  established  church. 

Mr.  Pitt  was  no  friend  to  the  penal  laws  :  his 
statesmanship  was  superior  to  the  narrow  jealousies 
which  favoured  them.^  On  this  occasion  he  had 
been  disposed  to  support  the  claims  of  the  dissen- 
ters :  but  yielding  to  the  opinion  of  the  bishops,^  he 
was  constrained  to  oppose  the  motion.  His  speech 
betrayed  the  embarrassment  of  his  situation.  His 
accustomed  force  and  clearness  forsook  him.  He 
drew  distinctions  between  political  and  civil  liberty  ; 
maintained  the  right  of  the  state  to  distribute  poli- 
tical power  to  whom  it  pleased ;  and  dwelt  upon  the 
duty  of  upholding  the  established  church.  Mr. 
Fox  supported  the  cause  of  the  dissenters  ;  and  pro- 
mised them  success  if  they  persevered  in  demanding 
the  redress  of  their  grievances.  The  motion  was  lost 
by  a  majority  of  seventy-eight.^ 

In  1789,  Mr.  Beaufoy  renewed  his  motion :  and 
Corporation  ^^  ^  recapitulation  of  his  previous  argu- 
Acts!^May  i^Guts,  added  some  striking  illustrations  of 
8th,  1789.  ^]^g  operation  of  the  law.  The  incapacity 
of  dissenters  extended  not  only  to  government  em- 
ployments, but  to  the  direction  of  the  Bank  of 
England,  the  East  India  Company,  and  other  char- 
tered companies.  When  the  Pretender  had  marched 
to  the  very  centre  of  England,  the  dissenters  had 

1  '  To  the  mind  of  Pitt  the  whole  system  of  penal  laws  was  utterly 
abhorrent.' — Lord  Stanhope^s  Life,  ii.  276. 

'^  See  Tomline's  Life  of  Pitt,  ii,  255  ;  Lord  Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt, 
i.  337 ;  Life  of  Eishop  Watson,  written  by  himself,  i.  261. 

3  Ayes,  98 ;  Noes,  176.    Pari.  Hist.,  xxri.  780-832. 


Co7^poration  and  Test  Acis,  17S9.      103 

taken  up  arms  in  defence  of  the  king's  government : 
but  instead  of  earning  rewards  for  their  loyalty,  they 
were  obliged  to  shelter  themselves  from  penalties, 
under  the  Act  of  Grrace, — intended  for  the  protec- 
tion of  rebels. 

Mr.  Fox  supported  the  motion  with  all  his  ability. 
Men  were  to  be  tried,  he  said,  not  by  their  opinions, 
but  by  their  actions.  Yet  the  dissenters  were  dis- 
countenanced by  the  state, — not  for  their  actions, 
which  were  good  and  loyal,  but  for  their  religious 
opinions,  of  which  the  state  disapproved.  No  one 
could  impute  to  them  opinions  or  conduct  dangerous 
to  the  state  ;  and  Parliament  had  practically  ad- 
mitted the  injustice  of  the  disqualifying  laws,  by 
passing  annual  acts  of  indemnity.  To  one  remark- 
able observation,  later  times  have  given  unexpected 
significance.  He  said  :  '  It  would  perhaps  be  con- 
tended that  the  repeal  of  the  Corporation  and  Test 
Acts  might  enable  the  dissenters  to  obtain  a  majo- 
rity. This  he  scarcely  thought  probable  :  but  it 
appeared  fully  sufficient  to  answer,  that  if  the  majo- 
rity of  the  people  of  England  should  ever  be  for  the 
abolition  of  the  established  church,  in  such  a  case 
the  abolition  ought  immediately  to  follow.'  ^ 

Mr.  Pitt  opposed  the  motion  in  a  temperate 
speech.  'Allowing  that  there  is  no  natural  right 
to  interfere  with  religious  opinions,'  he  contended 
that  'when  they  are  such  as  may  produce  a  civil 
inconvenience,  the  government  has  a  right  to  guard 

*  '  If  the  dissenters  from  the  establishment  become  a  majority  of 
the  people,  the  establishment  itself  ought  to  be  altered  or  qualified.' 
— Paley's  Moral  and  Political  Philosojphy,  book  yi,  ch.  x. 


104  Religious  Liberty. 

against  the  probability  of  the  civil  inconvenience 
being  produced.'  He  admitted  the  improved  intelli- 
gence and  loyalty  of  Eoman  Catholics,  whose  opinions 
had  formerly  been  dangerous  to  the  state  ;  and  did 
justice  to  the  character  of  the  dissenters :  while  he 
justified  the  maintenance  of  disqualifying  laws,  as  a 
precautionary  measure,  in  the  interest-^  of  the  esta- 
blished church.  The  motion  was  lost  by  the  small 
majority  of  twenty.^ 

Encouraged  by  so  near  an  approach  to  success,  the 
Corporation  disscuters  coiitinued  to  press  their  claims  ; 
Acts.  and  at  their  earnest  solicitation,  Mr.  Fox 

Mr.  Fox's 

motion,        himsclf  uudcrtook  to  advocate  their  cause. 

March  2ud, 

1790.  In  March  1790,  he  moved  the  consideration 

of  the  Test  and  Corporation  Acts,  in  a  committee  of 
the  whole  House.  He  referred  to  the  distinguished 
loyalty  of  the  dissenters,  in  1715  and  1745,  when 
the  high  church  party,  who  now  opposed  their 
claims,  had  been  'hostile  to  the  reigning  family, 
and  active  in  exciting  tumults,  insurrections,  and 
rebellions.'  He  urged  the  repeal  of  the  test  laws, 
with  a  view  to  allay  the  jealousies  of  dissenters 
against  the  church ;  and  went  so  far  as  to  affirm 
that  '  if  this  barrier  of  partition  were  removed,  the 
very  name  of  dissenter  would  be  no  more.' 

Mr.  Pitt's  resistance  to  concession  was  now  more 
decided  than  on  any  previous  occasion.  Again  he 
maintained  the  distinction  between  religious  tolera- 
tion and  the  defensive  policy  of  excluding  from 
office  those  who  were  likely  to  prejudice  the  esta- 

'  Ayes,  102  ;  Noes,  122.  Pari.  Hist.,  xxviii.  1-41.  See  Tomline's 
Life  of  Pitt,  iii.  18. 


Corporation  and  Test  Acts,  1790.      105 

blislied  church.  No  one  had  a  right  to  demand 
public  ofl&ces,  which  were  distributed  by  the  govern- 
ment for  the  benefit  of  the  state ;  and  which  might 
properly  be  withheld  from  persons  opposed  to  the 
constitution.  The  establishment  would  be  endan- 
gered by  the  repeal  of  the  test  laws,  as  dissenters, 
honestly  disapproving  of  the  church,  would  use  all 
legal  means  for  its  subversion. 

Mr.  Beaufoy  replied  to  Mr.  Pitt  in  a  speech  of 
singular  force.  If  the  test  laws  were  to  be  main- 
tained, he  said,  as  part  of  a  defensive  policy,  in 
deference  to  the  fears  of  the  chm'ch,  the  same  fears 
might  justify  the  exclusion  of  dissenters  from  Par- 
liament,— their  disqualification  to  vote  at  elections, 
— their  right  to  possess  property,  or  even  their 
residence  within  the  realm.  If  political  fears  were 
to  be  the  measure  of  justice  and  public  policy,  what 
extremities  might  not  be  justified  ? 

Mr.  Burke,  who  on  previous  occasions  had  ab- 
sented himself  from  the  House  when  this  question 
was  discussed,  and  who  even  now  confessed  '  that  he 
had  not  been  able  to  satisfy  himself  altogether '  on 
the  subject,  spoke  with  characteristic  warmth  against 
tlie  motion.  His  main  arguments  were  founded 
upon  the  hostility  of  the  dissenters  to  the  established 
church,  of  which  he  adduced  evidence  from  the 
writings  of  Dr.  Priestley  and  Dr.  Price,  and  from 
two  nonconformist  catechisms.  If  such  men  had 
the  power,  they  undoubtedly  had  the  will  to  over- 
throw the  church  of  England,  as  the  church  of 
France  had  just  been  overthrown.  Mr.  Fox,  in 
reply,  deplored  the  opposition  of  Mr.  Burke,  which 


io6  Religious  Liberty. 

lie  referred  to  its  true  cause, — a  liorror  of  the 
Frencli  Eevolution, — which  was  no  less  fatal  to  the 
claims  of  dissenters,  than  to  the  general  progress  of 
a  liberal  policy.  Mr.  Fox's  motion,  which,  in  the 
previous  year,  had  been  lost  by  a  narrow  majority, 
was  now  defeated  by  a  majority  of  nearly  three  to 
one.* 

The  further  discussion  of  the  test  laws  was  not 
catiioiic  resumed  for  nearly  forty  years :  but  other 
1791.  questions  anectmg  religious  liberty  were 

not  overlooked.  In  1791,  Mr.  Mi tford  brought  in  a 
bill  for  the  relief  of  '  Protesting  Catholic  Dissenters,' 
— or  Eoman  Catholics  who  protested  against  the 
pope's  temporal  authority,  and  his  right  to  excom- 
municate kings  and  absolve  subjects  from  their 
allegiance, — as  well  as  the  right  alleged  to  be 
assumed  by  Eoman  Catholics,  of  nqt  keeping  faith 
with  heretics.  It  was  proposed  to  relieve  such 
persons  from  the  penal  statutes,  upon  their  taking 
an  oath  to  this  efiect.  The  proposal  was  approved 
by  all  but  Mr.  Fox,  who,  in  accepting  the  measure, 
contended  that  the  relief  should  be  extended  gene- 
rally to  Eoman  Catholics.  Mr.  Pitt  also  avowed  his 
wish  that  many  of  the  penal  statutes  against  the 
Catholics  should  be  repealed.'^ 

»  294  to  105.  Pari.  Hist.,  xxviii.  387-452  ;  Lord  Sidmouth's  Life, 
i.  73  ;  Tomline's  Life  of  Pitt,  iii.  99  ;  Fox's  Mem.,  ii.  361,  362.  The 
subject  gave  rise,  at  this  time,  to  much  written  controversy.  Tracts 
by  Bishops  Sherlock  and  Hoadley  were  republished.  One  of  the 
best  pamphlets  on  the  side  of  the  dissenters  was  '  The  Eights  of 
Protestant  Dissenters,  by  a  Layman,  1789.'  The  Bishop  of  Oxford, 
writing  to  Mr.  Peel  in  1828,  speaks  of  fourteen  volumes  on  the  sub- 
ject, WTitten  in  1789  and  1790. — FeeVs  Mem.,  i.  65. 

-  Pari.  Hist.,  xxviii.  1262,  1364  ;  Tomline's  Life  of  Pitt,  iii.  249  ; 
Lord  Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt,  ii.  100. 


Relief  to  Catholics,  1791.  107 

The  bill  was  open  to  grave  objections.  It  imputed 
to  the  Catholics  as  a  body,  opinions  repudiated  by 
the  most  enlightened  professors  of  their  faith.  Mr. 
Pitt  received  an  explicit  assurance  from  several 
foreign  universities  that  Catholics  claimed  for  the 
pope  no  civil  jurisdiction  in  England,  nor  any 
power  to  absolve  British  subjects  from  their  alle- 
giance ;  and  that  there  was  no  tenet  by  which  they 
were  justified  in  not  keeping  faith  with  heretics.^ 
Again,  this  proposed  oath  required  Catholics  to  re- 
nounce doctrines  in  no  sense  affecting  the  state. 
In  the  House  of  Lords,  these  objections  were  forcibly 
urged  by  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  Dr. 
Horsley,  bishop  of  St.  David's ;  and  to  the  credit  of 
the  episcopal  bench,  the  latter  succeeded  in  giving 
to  the  measure  a  more  liberal  and  comprehensive 
character,  according  to  the  views  of  Mr.  Fox.  An 
oath  was  framed,  not  obnoxious  to  the  general  body 
of  Catholics,  the  taking  of  which  secured  them  com- 
plete freedom  of  worship  and  education  ;  exempted 
their  property  from  invidious  regulations ;  opened 
to  them  the  practice  of  the  law  in  all  its  branches  ; 
and  restored  to  peers  their  ancient  privilege  of 
intercourse  with  the  king.^ 

In  the  debates  upon  the  Test  Act,  the  peculiarity 
of  the  law,  as  affecting  members  of  the  Test  Act 
church  of  Scotland,  had  often  been  alluded  1791.  ^°  ' 
to ;  and  in  1791,  a  petition  was  presented  from  the 

1  See  liis  questions  and  the  answers,  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  199,  App. 
No.  91 ;  Butler's  Hist.  Mem.,  iv.  10. 

2  Pari.  Hist.,  xxix.   113-115,  664;  31  Geo.  III.  c.  32;  Butler'^ 
Hist.  Mem.,  It.  44,  52;  Quarterly  Eev.,  Oct.  1852,  p.  bbb. 


io8  Religious  Liberty. 

General  Assembly,  praying  for  relief.  On  the  lOth 
April  18th  ^^  ^^^-y.  Sir  Grilbert  Elliot  moved  for  a  com- 
1791.  mittee  of  the  whole  House  upon  the  subject. 

To  treat  the  member  of  an  established  church  as  a 
dissenter,  was  an  anomaly  too  monstrous  to  be  de- 
fended. Mr.  Dundas  admitted  that,  in  order  to 
qualify  himself  for  office,  he  had  communicated 
with  the  church  of  England, — a  ceremony  to  which 
members  of  his  church  had  no  objection.  It  would 
have  been  whimsical  indeed  to  contend  that  the 
Scotch  were  excluded  from  office  by  any  law,  as 
their  undue  share  in  the  patronage  of  the  state  had 
been  a  popular  subject  of  complaint  and  satire :  but 
whether  they  enjoyed  office  by  receiving  the  most 
solemn  rites  of  a  church  of  which  they  were  not 
members,  or  by  the  operation  of  acts  of  indemnity, 
their  position  was  equally  anomalous.  But  as  their 
case  formed  part  of  the  general  law  affecting  dis- 
senters, which  Parliament  was  in  no  humour  to 
entertain,  the  motion  was  defeated  by  a  large 
majority.^ 

In  1792,  Scotch  Episcopalians  were  relieved  from 
Restraints  restraints  which  had  been  provoked  by  the 
Episco-  disaffection  of  the  Episcopalian  clergy  in 
repealed.  the  roigus  of  Auue  and  Greorge  II.  As 
they  no  longer  professed  allegiance  to  the  Stuarts, 
or  refused  to  pray  for  the  reigning  king,  there  was 
no  pretext  for  these  invidious  laws ;  and  they  were 
repealed  with  the  concurrence  of  all  parties.^ 

In  the  same  year  Mr.  Fox,   despairing,  for  the 

•  Ayes,  62 ;  Noes,  149.    Pari.  Hist.,  xxix.  488-510. 
2  Pari.  Hist.,  xxix.  1372. 


Unitarians,  1792.  109 

present,  of  any   relaxation    of  the   test   laws,   en- 
deavoured to  obtain  the  repeal  of  certain  Penai 
penal  statutes  afifecting  religious  opinions,  respecting 

religious 

His  bill  proposed  to  repeal  several  Acts  of,  opinions 

.    .  .  (Unita- 

this  nature :  ^  but  his  main  object  was  to  nans), 

'^  May  nth, 

exempt  the  Unitarians,  who  had  petitioned  1^92. 
for  relief,  from  the  penalties  specially  affecting  their 
particular  persuasion.  They  did  not  pray  for  civil 
enfranchisement,  but  simply  for  religious  freedom. 
In  deprecating  the  prejudices  excited  against  this 
sect,  he  said,  '  Dr.  South  had  traced  their  pedigree 
from  wretch  to  wretch,  back  to  the  devil  himself. 
These  descendants  of  the  devil  were  his  clients.'  He 
attributed  the  late  riots  at  Birmingham,  and  the 
attack  upon  Dr.  Priestley,  to  religious  bigotry  and 
persecution;  and  claimed  for  this  unpopular  sect, 
at  least  the  same  toleration  as  other  dissenting 
bodies.  Mr.  Burke,  in  opposing  the  motion,  made 
a  fierce  onslaught  upon  the  Unitarians.  They  were 
hostile  to  the  church,  he  said,  and  had  combined  to 
effect  its  ruin :  they  had  adopted  the  doctrines  of 
Paine ;  and  approved  of  the  revolutionary  excesses 
of  the  French  Jacobins.  The  Unitarians  were  boldly 
defended  by  Mr.  William  Smith, — a  constant  advo- 
cate of  religious  liberty,  who,  growing  old  and 
honoured  in  that  cause,  lived  to  be  the  Father  of 
the  House  of  Commons.  Mr.  Pitt  declared  his  re- 
probation of  the  Unitarians,  and  opposed  the  motion, 
which  was  lost  by  a  majority  of  seventy-nine.^     Mr. 

»  Viz.  9  &  10  "Will.  III.  c.  32  (for  suppressing  blasphemy  and  pro- 
faneness) ;  1  Edw.  VI.  c.  1  ;  1  Mary,  c.  3  ;  13  Eliz.  c.  2. 

-  Ayes,  63  ;  Noes,  142.  Pari.  Hist.,  xxix.  1372  ;  Tomline's  Life 
ofPitt,  iii.  317. 


no  Religious  Liberty. 

Pitt  and  other  statesmen,  in  withliolding  civil  rights 
from  dissenters,  had  been  careful  to  admit  their 
title  to  religious  freedom :  but  this  vote  unequivo- 
cally declared  that  doctrines  and  opinions  might 
justly  be  punished  as  an  offence. 

Meanwhile  the  perilous  distractions  of  Ireland, 
Catholic  ^^^  ^  formidable  combination  of  the 
SeTand,  Catholic  body,  forced  upon  the  attention 
■^^^^'  of    the   government   the  wrongs  of  Irish 

Catholics.  The  gTeat  body  of  the  Irish  people  were 
denied  all  the  rights  of  citizens.  Their  public  wor- 
ship was  still  proscribed  :  their  property,  their  social 
and  domestic  relations,  and  their  civil  liberties  were 
under  interdict :  they  were  excluded  from  all  offices 
civil  and  military,  and  even  from  the  professions  of 
law  and  medicine.^  Already  the  penal  code  affecting 
the  exercise  of  their  religion  had  been  partially  re- 
laxed :  ^  but  they  still  laboured  under  all  the  civil 
disqualifications  which  the  jealousy  of  ages  had  im- 
posed. Mr.  Pitt  not  only  condemned  the  injustice 
of  such  disabilities :  but  hoped  by  a  policy  of  con- 
ciliation, to  heal  some  of  the  unhappy  feuds  by 
which  society  was  divided.  Ireland  could  no  longer 
be  safely  governed  upon  the  exclusive  principles  of 
Protestant  ascendency.  Its  people  must  not  claim 
in  vain  the  franchises  of  British  subjects.  And  ac- 
cordingly in  1792,  some  of  the  most  galling  dis- 

^  Some  restrictions  had  been  added  even  in  this  reign.  Butler's 
Hist.  .Mem.,  iii.  367,  ct  scq. ;  467-477,  484 ;  O'Conor's  Hist,  of  the 
Irish  Catholics ;  Sydney  Smith's  Works,  i.  269  ;  Groldwin  Smith's 
Irish  Hist.,  &c.,  124. 

■-  Viz.  in  1774.  1778,  and  .1782 ;  13  &  14  Geo.  III.  c.  35  ;  17  &  18 
Geo.  III.  c.  49 ;  22  Geo.  III.  c.  24  (Irish) ;  Parnell's  Hist,  of  the 
Penal  Laws,  84,  &c. ;  Butler's  Hist.  Mem.,  iii.  486. 


Relief  to  Catholics,  1793.  in 

abilities  were  removed  by  the  Irish  Parliament. 
Catholics  were  admitted  to  the  legal  profession  on 
taking  the  oath  of  allegiance,  and  allowed  to  become 
clerks  to  attorneys.  Eestrictions  on  the  education 
of  their  children,  and  on  their  intermarriages  with 
Protestants,  were  also  removed.^ 

In  the  next  year  more  important  privileges  were 
conceded.      All    remaining    restraints    on  cathoUc 
Catholic  worship  and  education,   and  the  SSm, 
disposition    of   property,  were    removed.  ^'^'^' 
Catholics  were   admitted  to  vote  at  elections,  on 
taking  the  oaths  of  allegiance  and  abjuration :  to  all 
but  the  higher  civil  and  military  offices,  and  to  the 
honours  and  emoluments  of  Dublin  University.     In 
the  law  they  could  not  rise  to  the  rank  of  king's 
counsel :    nor    in    the  army  beyond    the  rank    of 
colonel :    nor   in   their    own   counties,   could    they 
aspire  to  the  offices  of  sheriff  and  sub-sheriff:  ^  their 
highest  ambition  was    still   curbed ;    but  they  re- 
ceived a  wide  enfranchisement,  beyond  their  former 
hopes. 

In  this  year  tardy  justice  was  also  rendered  to  the 
Roman  Catholics  of  Scotland.     All  excite-  cathoUc 
ment    upon    the    subject    having   passed  Siand 
away,    a  bill  was  brought  in  and  passed  ■^^^^* 
without  opposition,  to  relieve  them,  like  their  Eng- 
lish brethren,  from  many  grievous  penalties  to  which 
they  were  exposed.     In  proposing  the  measure,  the 

'  32  Geo.  III.  c.  21  (Irish) ;  Debates  (Ireland),  xii.  39,  &c. ;  Life 
of  Grattan,  ii.  53. 

-  33  Geo.  III.  c.  21  (Irish)  ;  Debates  of  Irish  Parliament,  xiii. 
199  ;  Plowden's  Hist.,  ii.  421  ;  Adolphus'  Hist.,  vi.  249-2o6  ;  Lord 
Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt,  ii.  277 ;  Butler's  Hist.  Mem.,  iv.  62  ;  Life  of 
Grattan,  iv.  87  ;  Parnell's  Hist,  of  the  Penal  Laws,  124. 


112  Religiotcs  Liberty. 

lord  advocate  stated  that  the  obnoxious  statutes 
were  not  so  obsolete  as  might  be  expected.  At  that 
very  time  a  Eoman  Catholic  gentleman  was  in  dan- 
ger of  being  stripped  of  his  estate, — which  had  been 
in  his  family  for  at  least  a  century  and  a  half, — by 
a  relation  having  no  other  claim  to  it,  than  that 
which  he  derived,  as  a  Protestant,  from  the  cruel 
provisions  of  the  law.^ 

The  Quakers  next  appealed  to  Parliament  for  re- 
Quakers,       lief.     In   1796,  they  presented  a  petition 

April  21st,  \^ 

1796.  describing  their  sufferings  on  account  of 

religious  scruples ;  and  Mr.  Sergeant  Adair  brought 
in  a  bill  to  facilitate  the  recovery  of  tithes  from 
members  of  that  sect,  without  subjecting  them  to 
imprisonment ;  and  to  allow  them  to  be  examined 
upon  afi&rmation  in  criminal  cases.  The  remedy 
proposed  for  the  recovery  of  tithes  had  already  been 
pro-vided  by  statute,  in  demands  not  exceeding  10^.  ;^ 
and  the  sole  object  of  this  part  of  the  bill  was  to  en- 
sure the  recovery  of  all  tithes  without  requiring  the 
consent  of  the  Quakers  themselves,  to  which  they 
had  so  strong  a  religious  scruple,  that  they  preferred 
perpetual  imprisonment.  At  that  very  time,  seven 
of  their  brethren  were  lying  in  the  gaol  at  York, 
without  any  prospect  of  relief.  The  bill  was  passed 
by  the  Commons,  but  was  lost  in  the  Lords,  upon 
the  representation  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
that  it  involved  a  question  of  right  of  very  great  im- 
portance, which  there  was  not  then  time  to  consider.^ 

»  Pari.  Hist.,  xxx.  766  ;  33  Geo.  III.  c.  44 ;  Butler's  Hist.  Mem., 
iv.  103. 

=  7  &  8  Will.  III.  c.  34 ;  1  Geo.  I.,  st.  2,  c.  6 ;  Pari.  Hist.,  ix. 
1220. 

3  Pari.  Hist.,  satxii.  1022. 


The  Quakers,  i797-  113 

In  the  next  session  the  bill  was  renewed,^  when  it 
encountered  the  resolute  opposition  of  Sir  Quakers, 
William  Scott.^  'The  opinions  held  by 
the  Quakers,'  he  said,  '  were  of  such  a  nature  as  to 
affect  the  civil  rights  of  property,  and  therefore  he 
considered  them  as  unworthy  of  legislative  indul- 
gence.' If  one  man  had  conscientious  scruples 
against  the  payment  of  tithes  to  which  his  property 
was  legally  liable,  another  might  object  to  the  pay- 
ment of  rent  as  sinful,  while  a  third  might  hold  it 
irreligious  to  pay  his  debts.  If  the  principle  of  in- 
dulgence were  ever  admitted,  '  the  sect  of  anti-tithe 
Christians  would  soon  become  the  most  numerous 
and  flourishing  in  the  kingdom.'  He  argued  that 
the  security  of  property  in  tithes  would  be  diminished 
by  the  bill,  and  that  '  the  tithe-owner  would  become 
an  owner,  not  of  property,  but  of  suits.'  It  was  re- 
plied that  the  tithe-owner  would  be  enabled  by  the 
bill  to  recover  his  demands  by  summary  distress,  in- 
stead of  punishing  the  Quaker  with  useless  imprison- 
ment. The  very  remedy,  indeed,  was  provided, 
which  the  law  adopted  for  the  recovery  of  rent.  The 
bill  was  also  opposed  by  the  solicitor-general.  Sir 
John  Mitford,  who  denied  that  Quakers  entertained 
any  conscientious  scruples  at  all,  against  the  pay- 
ment of  tithes.  The  question  for  going  into  com- 
mittee on  the  bill  was  decided  by  the  casting  vote 
of  the  speaker :  but  upon  a  subsequent  day,  the  bill 
was  lost  by  a  majority  of  sixteen.^ 

Such  had  been  the  narrow  jealousy  of  the  state, 

»  Pari.  Hist.,  xxxii.  1206.  2  Afterwards  Lord  Stowell. 

'  Pari.  Hist.,  xxxii.  1508. 

VOL.    III.  I 


114  Religious  Liberty. 

that  Eoman  Catholics  and  dissenters,  however  loyal 
cathoUcs  and  patriotic,  were  not  permitted  to  share 
iniiitia.  in  the  defence  of  their  country.  They 
could  not  be  trusted  with  arms,  lest  they  should 
turn  them  against  their  own  countrymen.  In  1797, 
Mr.  Wilberforce  endeavoured  to  redress  a  part  of 
this  wrong,  by  obtaining  the  admission  of  Eoman 
Catholics  to  the  militia.  Supported  by  Mr.  Pitt, 
he  succeeded  in  passing  his  bill  through  the  Com- 
mons. In  the  Lords,  however,  it  was  opposed  by 
Bishop  Horsley  and  other  peers ;  and  its  provisions 
being  extended  to  dissenters,  its  fate  was  sealed.^ 

The  English  ministers  were  still  alive  to  the  im- 
Lord  Fitz-  portance  of  a  liberal  and  conciliatory  po- 
poiijy^^  licy,  in  the  government  of  Ireland.  In 
1795.  1795,  Lord  FitzwLlliam  accepted  the  office 

of  lord-lieutenant,  in  order  to  carry  out  such  a  po- 
licy. He  even  conceived  himself  to  have  the 
authority  of  the  cabinet  to  favour  an  extensive  en- 
franchisement of  Catholics  :  but  having  committed 
himself  too  deeply  to  that  party,  he  was  recalled.^ 
There  were,  indeed,  insurmountable  difficulties  in 
reconciling  an  extended  toleration  to  Catholics, 
with  Protestant  ascendency  in  the  Irish  Parlia- 
ment. 

But  the  union  of  Catholic  Ireland  with  Protestant 

»  Wilberforce's  Life,  ii.  222.  The  debates  are  not  to  be  found  in 
the  Parliamentary  History.  '  No  power  in  Europe,  but  yourselves, 
has  ever  thought,  for  these  hundred  years  past,  of  asking  whether  a 
bayonet  is  Catholic,  or  Presbyterian,  or  Lutheran  ;  but  whether  it  is 
eharp  and  well-tempered.' — Fetcr  Flymley's  Letters;  Sydney  Smith's 
Works,  iii.  63. 

2  Pari.  Hist.,  xxxiv.  672,  &c. ;  Plowden's  Hist.,  ii.  467  ;  Butler's 
Hist.  Mem.,  iv.  66. 


Union  with  Ireland.  115 

Grreat   Britain,   introduced    new  considerations    of 
state  policy.     To  admit  Catholics  to  the  -gnionwith 
Parliament  of  the  United  Kingdom  would  J^Sction 
be  a  concession  full  of  popularity  to  the  cathoUc 
people  of  Ireland,  while  their  admission  to  ^^i^^^i^^i^^- 
a  legislature  comprising  an  overwhelming  Protestant 
majority,  would  be  free  from  danger  to  the  esta- 
blished church,  or  to  the  Protestant  character  of 
Parliament.     In  such  a  union  of  the  two  countries, 
the  two  nations  would  also  be  embraced.     In  the 
discussions  relating  to  the  Union,  the  removal  of 
Catholic  disabilities,  as  one  of  its  probable  conse- 
quences, was  frequently  alluded  to.     Mr.  Canning 
argued  that  the  Union  '  would  satisfy  the  j^,^  23rd 
friends  of  the  Protestant  ascendency,  with-  ^^^^• 
out  passing  laws  against  the  Catholics,  and  without 
maintaining  those  which  are  yet  in  force.'  ^  Jan.  31st. 
And  Mr.  Pitt  said:  'No  man  can  say  that  in  the 
present  state  of  things,  and  while  Ireland  remains  a 
separate  kingdom,  full  concessions  could  be  made  to 
the  Catholics,  without  endangering  the  state,  and 
shaking  the  constitution  of  Ireland  to  its  centre.' 
.     .     .     .  But '  when  the  conduct  of  the  Catholics 
shall  be  such  as  to  make  it  safe  for  the  government 
to  admit  them  to  a  participation  of  the  privileges 
granted  to  those  of  the  established  religion,  and 
when  the  temper  of  the  times  shall  be  favourable  to 
such  a  measure,  it  is  obvious  that  such  a  question 
may  be  agitated  in  a  united  Imperial  Parliament, 
with  much  greater   safety  than  it  could  be  in  a 

>  Pari.  Hist.,  xxsiv.  230  ;  Lord  Holland's  Mem.,  i.  161. 
I  2 


Ii6  Religio2is  Liberty, 

separate  legislature.'^  He  also  hinted  at  the  expe- 
diency of  proposing  some  mode  of  relieving  the 
poorer  classes  from  the  pressure  of  tithes,  and  for 
making  a  provision  for  the  Catholic  clergy,  without 
affecting  the  security  of  the  Protestant  establish- 
ment.^ 

In  securing  the  support  of  different  parties  in 
Theirisii  Ireland  to  the  Union,  the  question  of  Ca- 
S^ttie^^  tholic  disabilities  was  one  of  great  delicacy. 
Catholics.  Distinct  promises,  which  might  have  secured 
the  hearty  support  of  the  Catholics,  would  have 
alienated  the  Protestants, — by  far  the  most  power- 
ful party, — and  endangered  the  success  of  the  whole 
measure.  At  the  same  time,  there  was  hazard  of 
the  Catholics  being  gained  over  to  oppose  the  Union, 
by  expectations  of  relief  from  the  Irish  Parliament.^^ 
Lord  Cornwallis,  alive  to  these  difficulties^  appears  to 
have  met  them  with  consummate  address.  Careful 
not  to  commit  himself  or  the  government  to  any 
specific  engagements,  he  succeeded  in  encouraging 
the  hopes  of  the  Catholics,  without  alarming  the 
Protestant  party.'*     The  sentiments  of  the  govern- 

•  Pari.  Hist.,  xxxiv.  272. 

-  Mr.  Pitt  and  Lord  Grenville  agreed  generally  upon  the  Catholic 
claims.  '  Previously  to  the  Union  with  Ireland,  it  had  never  entered 
into  the  mind  of  the  latter  that  there  could  be  any  further  relaxation 
of  the  laws  against  Papists  :  but  from  that  time  he  had  been  con- 
vinced that  everything  necessary  for  them  might  be  granted  without 
the  slightest  danger  to  the  Protestant  interest.' — Abstract  of  Lord 
Grenviile's  Letter  to  the  Principal  of  Brazenose,  1810. — Lm^d  Col- 
chester's Diary,  ii.  224. 

'  Cornwallis  Corr.,  iii.  51. 

*  Jan.  2nd,  1799,  he  writes :  '  I  shall  endeavour  to  give  them  (tho 
Catholics)  the  most  favourable  impressions  without  holding  out  to 
rhem  hopos  of  any  relaxation  on  the  part  of  government,  and  shall 
leave  no  effort  untried  to  prevent  an  opposition  to  the  Union  being 
made  the  measure  of  that  party.' — Corr.,  iii.  29. 


I 


Union  with  Ireland.  117 

ment  were  known  to  be  generally  favourable  to 
measures  of  relief :  but  Mr.  Pitt  had  been  forbidden 
by  the  king  to  offer  any  concessions  whatever ;  ^  nor 
had  he  himself  determined  upon  the  measures  which 
it  would  be  advisable  to  propose.^  He  was,  there- 
fore, able  to  deny  that  he  had  given  any  pledge 
upon  the  subject,  or  that  the  Catholics  conceived 
themselves  to  have  received  any  such  pledge  :^  but 
he  admitted  that  they  had  formed  strong  expecta- 


And  again,  Jan.  28th,  1799 :  '  I  much  doubt  tiie  policy  of  at  pre- 
sent holding  out  to  them  any  decided  expectations  :  it  might  -weaken 
us  with  the  Protestants,  and  might  not  strengthen  us  with  the  Catho- 
lics, whilst  they  look  to  carry  their  question  unconnected  with  Union,' 
—Corr.,  iii.  55.     See  also  Ihid.,  63,  149,  327,  344,  347. 

»  June  11th,  1798,  the  king  writes  to  Mr.  Pitt:  'Lord  Comwallis 
must  clearly  understand  that  no  indulgence  can  be  granted  to  the 
Catholics  farther  than  has  been,  I  am  afraid  unadvisedly,  done  in 
former  sessions,  and  that  he  must  by  a  steady  conduct  effect  in  future 
the  union  of  that  kingdom  with  this. — Lord  Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt, 
iii.  App.  xvi.         • 

Again,  Jan.  24th,  1790,  having  seen  in  a  letter  from  Lord  Castle- 
reagh  'an  idea  of  an  established  stipend  by  the  authority  of  govern- 
ment for  the  Catholic  clergy  of  Ireland,'  he  wrote :  '  I  am  certain 
any  encouragement  to  such  an  idea  must  give  real  offence  to  the 
established  church  in  Ireland,  as  well  as  to  the  true  friends  of  our 
constitution ;  for  it  is  certainly  creating  a  second  church  establish- 
ment, which  could  not  but  be  highly  injurious.' — Ibid.,  xviii. 

-  Mr.  Pitt  wrote  to  Lord  Comwallis,  Nov.  17th,  1788  :  'Mr.  Elliot, 
when  he  brought  me  your  letter,  stated  very  strongly  all  the  argu- 
ments which  he  thought  might  induce  us  to  admit  the  Catholics  to 
Parliament  and  office,  but  I  confess  he  did  not  satisfy  me  of  the 
practicability  of  such  a  measure  at  this  time,  or  of  the  propriety  of 
attempting  it.  With  respect  to  a  provision  for  the  Catholic  clergj-, 
and  some  arrangement  respecting  tithes,  I  am  happy  to  find  an 
uniform  opinion  in  favour  of  the  proposal,  among  all  the  Irish  I  have 
seen.'  —Lord  Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt,  iii.  161.  See  also  Castlereagh 
Corr.,  i.  73  ;  Lord  Colchester's  Mem.,  i.  250,  511. 

*  Lord  Camden  told  me  that  boing  a  member  of  Mr.  Pitt's  govern- 
ment in  1800,  he  knew  that  Mr.  Pitt  had  never  matured  any  plan 
for  giving  what  is  called  emancipation  to  the  Koman  Catholics.' — 
Lord  Colchester's  Diary,  iii.  326. 

3  March  2oth,  1801 ;  Pari.  Hist.,  xxxv.  1124;  and  see  Comwallis 
Corr.,  iii.  343-350. 


sionsto         jj^^  been  accomplished,  they  agreed  that 
g^P°|^'      the  altered  relations  of  the  two  countries 


1 1 8  Religious  Liberty. 

tions  of  remedial  measures  after  the  Union, — of 
which  indeed  there  is  abundant  testimony.^ 

These  expectations  Mr.  Pitt  and  his  colleagues 
conces-        wcre  prepared  to  satisfy.    When  the  Union 

sions  t 
Catholics 
propos 
after  t; 

^"^°^'  would  allow  them  to  do  full  justice  to  the 
Catholics,  without  any  danger  to  the  established 
church.  They  were  of  opinion  that  Catholics  might 
now  be  safely  admitted  to  office,  and  to  the  privilege 
of  sitting  in  Parliament ;  and  that  dissenters  should, 
at  the  same  time,  be  relieved  from  civil  disabilities. 
It  was  also  designed  to  attach  the  Catholic  clergy  to 
the  state,  by  making  them  dependent  upon  public 
funds  for  a  part  of  their  provision,  and  to  induce 
them  to  submit  to  superintendence.^  It  was  a 
measure  of  high  and  prescient  statesmanship, — 
worthy  of  the  genius  of  the  great  minister  who  had 
achieved  the  Union. 

But  toleration,  which  had  formerly  been  resisted 
Conces-  by  Parliament  and  the  people,  now  encoun- 
forbidden  tcrcd  the  iuviucible  opposition  of  the  king, 
Mng,  -who  refused  his  assent  to  fui'ther  measures 

of  concession,  as  inconsistent  with  the  obligations 
of  his  coronation  oath.  To  his  unfounded  scruples 
were  sacrificed  the  rights  of  millions,  and  the  peace 

^  Lord  Liverpool's  Mem.,  128;  Castlereagh  Corr.,  iv.  11,  13,  34; 
Lord  Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt,  iii.  263,  281-288,  &c.,  App.,  xxiii.  et 
seq. ;  Lord  Malraesbury's  Corr.,  iv.  1,  et  seq.  ;  Cornwallis'  Corr.,  ii. 
436;  Butler's  Hist.  Mem.,  iv.  70;  see  also  Edinb.  Eev.,  Jan.  1858. 

2  Mr.  Pitt's  Letter  to  the  King,  Jan.  olst,  1801  ;  Lord  Sidmouth's 
Life,  i.  289  ;  Lord  Cornwallis's  Corr.,  iii.  325,  335,  SU  ;  Court  and 
Cabinets  of  Geo.  III.,  iii.  129.  The  Irish  Catholic  Bishops  had 
consented  to  allow  the  crown  a  veto  on  their  nomination. — Butler's 
Hist.  Mem.,  iv.  112-134. 


Catholic  Claims^  1801.  119 

of  Ireland.  The  measure  was  arrested  at  its  incep- 
tion. The  minister  fell ;  and  in  deference  to  the 
king's  feelings,  was  constrained  to  renounce  his  own 
w^ise  and  liberal  policy.' 

But  the  question  of  Catholic  disabilities,  in  con- 
nection with  the  government  of  Ireland,  Critical 

condition 

was  too  momentous  to  be  set  at  rest  by  of  Ireland, 
the  religious  scruples  of  the  king,  and  the  respectful 
forbearance  of  statesmen.     In  the  rebellion  of  1798, 
the  savage  hatred  of  Protestants  and  Catholics  had 
aggravated  the  dangers  of  that  critical  period.     Nor 
were  the  difficulties  of  administering  the  government 
overcome  by  the  Union.     The  abortive  rebellion  of 
Eobert  Emmett,  in  1803,  again  exposed  the  alarm- 
ing condition  of  Ireland ;  and  suggested  that  the 
social  dislocatioh  of  that  unhappy  country  needed  a 
more  statesmanlike  treatment  than  that  of  Protestant 
ascendency  and  irritating  disabilities.     For  the  pre- 
sent, however,  the  general  question  was  in  r^^^ 
abeyance,  in  Parliament.   Mr.  Pitt  had  been  queS  in 
silenced  by  the  king ;  and  Mr.  Addington's  ^^^y^^"^' 
administration  was  avowedly  anti-Catholic.     Yet  in 
1803,  Catholics   obtained  a  further   instalment   of 
relief, — being  exempted  from  certain  penalties  and 
disabilities,  on  taking  the  oath  and  subscribing  the 
declaration  prescribed  by  the  Act  of  1791.^ 

In  1804,  a  serious  agitation  for  Catholic  relief 
commenced   in   Ireland:   but   as   yet   the  jj-^. pitt 
cause   was  without   hope.     On  Mr.  Pitt's  ^^^*-^- 
restoration  to  power,  he  was  still  restrained  by  his 
engagement  to  the  king,  from  proposing  any  measure 

»  /Swpra,  Vol.  I.  92-97.  ^  43  Geo.  III.  c.  30. 


1 20  Religious  Liberty, 


for  the  relief  of  Catliolics  himself;  and  was  even 
obliged  to  resist  their  claims  when  advocated  by 
cathouc  others.^  In  1805,  the  discussion  of  the 
M^ch"'  general  question  was  resumed  in  Parliament 
25t]i,  1805.  i^y  j^Qj,^  Grrenville,  who  presented  a  petition 
from  the  Roman  Catholics  of  Ireland,  recounting 
the  disabilities  under  which  they  still  suffered.^ 

On  the  10th  May,  his  lordship  moved  for  a  com- 
LordGren-     mittee  of  the  whole  House  to  consider  this 

Tille's 

motion,        petition.     He  ursred  that  three-fourths  of 

May  10th,        ^  ° 

1805.  the  people  of  Ireland  were  Roman  Catholics, 

whose  existence  the  state  could  not  ignore.  At  the 
time  of  the  Revolution  they  had  been  excluded  from 
civil  privileges,  not  on  account  of  their  religion,  but 
for  their  political  adhesion  to  the  exiled  sovereign. 
In  the  present  reign  they  had  received  toleration  in 
the  exercise  of  their  religion,  power  to  acquire  land, 
the  enjoyment  of  the  elective  franchise,  and  the 
light  to  fill  many  offices  from  which  they  had  pre- 
viously been  excluded.  Whatever  objections  might 
have  existed  to  the  admission  of  Roman  Catholics  to 
the  Parliament  of  Ireland,  had  been  removed  by  the 
Union ;  as  in  the  Parliament  of  the  United  King- 
dom there  was  a  vast  preponderance  of  Protestants. 
This  argument  had  been  used  by  those  who  had  pro- 
moted the  Union.  It  had  encouraged  the  hopes  of 
the  Roman  Catholics  ;  and  now,  for  the  first  time 
since  the  Union,  that  body  had  appealed  to  Parlia- 
ment. His  lordship  dwelt  upon  their  loyalty,  as 
frequently  declared  by  the  Irish  Parliament,  exone- 

»  Lord  Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt,  iv.  297,  391. 
*  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  iv.  97. 


Catholic  Claims,  1805.  121 

rated  them  from  participation,  as  a  body,  in  tlie 
Eebellion,  combated  the  prejudice  raised  against 
them  on  account  of  the  recent  coronation  of  Napo- 
leon by  the  pope,  and  illustrated  the  feelings  which 
their  exclusion  from  lawful  objects  of  ambition 
naturally  excited  in  their  minds.  He  desired  to 
unite  all  classes  of  the  people  in  the  common  bene- 
fits and  common  interests  of  the  state. 

This  speech,  which  ably  presented  the  entire  case 
of  the  Eoman  Catholics,  opened  a  succession  of  de- 
bates, in  which  all  the  arguments  relating  to  their 
claims  were  elicited.^  As  regards  the  high  offices  of 
state,  it  was  urged  by  Lord  Hawkesbury,  that  while 
the  law  excluded  a  Eoman  Catholic  sovereign  from 
the  throne  of  his  inheritance,  it  could  scarcely  be 
allowed  that  the  councils  of  a  Protestant  king  should 
be  directed  by  Eoman  Catholics.  Eoman  Catholics, 
it  was  argued,  would  not  be  fit  persons  to  sit  in  Par- 
liament, so  long  as  they  refused  to  take  the  oath  of 
supremacy,  which  merely  renounced  foreign  do- 
minion and  jurisdiction.  In  Ireland,  their  admis- 
sion would  increase  the  influence  of  the  priesthood 
in  elections,  and  array  the  property  of  the  country 
on  one  side,  and  its  religion  and  numbers  on  the 
other.  The  Duke  of  Cumberland  opposed  the  prayer 
of  the  petition,  as  fatal  to  all  the  principles  upon 
which  the  House  of  Hanover  had  been  called  to  the 
throne.  Every  apprehension  and  prejudice  whicli 
could  be  appealed  to,  in  opposition  to  the  claims  of 
the  Eoman  Catholics,  was  exerted  in  this  debate. 
The  jDope,  their  master,  was  the  slave  and  tool  of 

'  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  iv.  651-729,  742. 


12  2  Religious  Liberty, 

Napoleon.  If  entrusted  with  power,  they  would 
resist  the  payment  of  tithes,  and  overthrow  the 
established  church.  Nay,  Catholic  families  would 
reclaim  their  forfeited  estates,  which  for  five  gene- 
rations had  been  in  the  possession  of  Protestants,  or 
had  since  been  repurchased  by  Catholics.  After 
two  nights'  debate.  Lord  Grenville's  motion  was 
negatived  by  a  majority  of  129.^ 

Mr.  Fox  also  offered  a  similar  motion  to  the  Cora- 
Mr.  Fox's  iiioiis,  founded  upon  a  petition  addressed  to 
modon  ^jjg^^  House.  The  people  whose  cause  he 
MayTsth,'  "^as  advocatiug,  amounted,  he  said,  to  be- 
^^^^*  tween  a  fourth  and  a  fifth  of  the  entire 

population  of  the  United  Kingdom.  So  large  a 
portion  of  his  fellow-subjects  had  been  excluded 
from  civil  rights,  not  on  account  of  their  religion, 
but  for  political  causes  which  no  longer  existed. 
Queen  Elizabeth  had  not  viewed  them  as  loyal  sub- 
jects of  a  Protestant  Queen.  The  character  and  con- 
duct of  the  Stuarts  had  made  the  people  distrustfuL 
of  the  Catholics.  At  the  time  of  the  Eevolution  '  it 
was  not  a  Catholic,  but  a  Jacobite,  you  wished  to 
restrain.'  In  Ireland,  again,  the  restrictions  upon 
Catholics  were  political  and  not  religious.  In  the 
civil  war  which  Imd  raged  there,  the  Catholics  were 
the  supporters  of  James,  and  as  Jacobites  were  dis- 
couraged and  restrained.  The  Test  Act  of  Charles 
II.  was  passed  because  the  sovereign  himself  was 
suspected  ;  and  Catholic  officers  were  excluded,  lest 
they  should  assist  him  in  his  endeavours  to  subvert 
the   constitution.      There   was   no   fear,   now,  of  a 

*  Contents,  49  ;  Non-contents,  178.     Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  iv,  843. 


Catholic  Clai77ZSy  1805.  123 

Protestaut  king  being  unduly  influenced  by  Cathcdic 
ministers.  The  danger  of  admitting  Catholics  to 
Parliament  was  chimerical.  Did  any  one  believe 
that  twenty  Catholic  members  would  be  returned 
from  the  whole  of  Ireland  ? '  In  reply  to  this  ques- 
tion. Dr.  Duigenan  asserted  that  Ireland  would 
return  upwards  of  eighty  Catholic  members,  and  the 
English  boroughs  twenty  more, — thus  forming  a 
compact  confederacy  of  100  members,  banded  to- 
gether for  the  subversion  of  all  our  institutions  in 
church  and  state. 

He  was  answered  eloquently,  and  in  a  liberal 
spirit,  by  Mr.  Grrattan,  in  the  first  speech  addressed 
by  him  to  the  Imperial  Parliament.  The  general 
discussion,  however,  was  not  distinguished,  on  either 
side,  by  much  novelty. 

The  speech  of  'Mr.  Pitt  serves  as  a  land-mark,  de- 
noting the  position  of  the  question  at  that  time. 
He  frankly  admitted  that  he  retained  his  opinion, 
formed  at  the  time  of  the  Union,  that  Catholics 
might  be  admitted  to  the  united  Parliament,  '  under 
proper  guards  and  conditions,'  without  '  any  danger 
to  the  established  church  or  the  Protestant  consti- 
tution.' But  the  circumstances  which  had  then 
prevented  him  from  proposing  such  a  measure  '  had 
made  so  deep,  so  lasting  an  impression  upon  his 
mind,  that  so  long  as  those  circumstances  continued 
to  operate,  he  should  feel  it  a  duty  imposed  upon 
him,  not  only  not  to  bring  forward,  but  not  in  any 
manner  to  be  a  party  in  bringing  forward,  or  in 
agitating  this  question.'  At  the  same  time,  he  de- 
»  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  iv.  834-854. 


1 24  Religious  Liberty, 

precated  its  agitation  by  others,  under  circumstances 
most  unfavourable  to  its  settlement.  Such  a  mea- 
sure would  be  generally  repugnant  to  members  of 
the  established  church, — to  the  nobility,  gentry,  and 
middle  classes,  both  in  England  and  Ireland, — as- 
suredly to  the  House  of  Lords,  which  had  just  de- 
clared its  opinion ;  ^  and,  as  he  believed,  to  the  great 
majority  of  the  House  of  Commons.  To  urge  forward 
a  measure,  in  opposition  to  obstacles  so  insuperable, 
could  not  advance  the  cause ;  while  it  encouraged 
delusive  hopes,  and  fostered  religious  and  political 
animosities.^ 

Mr.  Windham  denied  that  the  general  sentiment 
was  against  such  a  measure  ;  and  scouted  the  advice 
that  it  should  be  postponed  until  there  was  a  general 
concurrence  in  its  favour.  '  If  no  measure,'  he  said, 
'is  ever  to  pass  in  Parliament  which  has  not  the 
unanimous  sense  of  the  country  in  its  favour,  preju- 
dice and  passion  may  for  ever  triumph  over  reason 
and  sound  policy.'  After  a  masterly  reply  by  MrJ 
Fox,  which  closed  a  debate  of  two  -nights,  the 
House  proceeded  to  a  division,  when  his  motion 
was  lost  by  a  decisive  majority  of  one  hundred  and 
twelve.^ 

The  present  temper  of  Parliament  was  obviously 
The  Whig  unfavourable  to  the  Catholic  cause.  The 
Sosfaiid  the  l^opes  of  the  CathoHcs,  however,  were  again 

Catholics.         j,^.gg^   ^y  ^i^g    ^jgg^^j^    ^f   jy^j.^  p.^^^    ^^^    ^^^ 

1  The  debate  had  been  adjourned  till  the  day  after  the  decision  in 
the  Lords. 

2  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  iv.  1013. 

3  Ayes,  124;  Noes,  236.  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  iv.  1060;  Grattan's 
Life,  V.  2.^3-264. 


I 


Catholic  Claims,  1806.  125 

formation  of  the  Whig  Ministry  of  1806.  The 
cabinet  comprised  Lord  Grrenville,  Mr.  Fox,  and 
other  statesmen  who  had  advocated  Catholic  relief 
in  1801,  and  in  the  recent  debates  of  1805  ;  and 
the  Catholics  of  Ireland  did  not  fail  to  press  upon 
them  the  justice  of  renewing  the  consideration  of 
their  claims.  This  pressure  was  a  serious  embarrass- 
ment to  ministers.  After  the  events  of  1801,  they 
needed  no  warning  of  the  difficulty  of  their  position, 
which  otherwise  was  far  from  secure.  No  measure 
satisfactory  to  the  Catholics  could  be  submitted  to 
the  king ;  and  the  bare  mention  of  the  subject  was 
not  without  danger.  They  were  too  conscious  not 
only  of  His  Majesty's  inflexible  opinions,  but  of  his 
repugnance  to  themselves.  Mr.  Fox  perceived  so 
clearly  the  impossibility  of  approaching  the  king, 
that  he  persuaded  the  Catholic  leaders  to  forbear 
their  claims  for  the  present.  They  had  recently 
been  rejected,  by  large  majorities,  in  both  Houses  ; 
and  to  repeat  them  now,  would  merely  embarrass 
their  friends,  and  offer  another  easy  triumph  to  their 
enemies.^  But  it  is  hard  for  the  victims  of  wrong 
to  appreciate  the  difficulties  of  statesmen ;  and  the 
CathoKcs  murmured  at  the  apparent  desertion  of 
their  friends.  For  a  time  they  were  pacified  by  the 
liberal  administration  of  the  Duke  of  Bedford  in 
Ireland :  but  after  Mr.  Fox's  death,  and  the  disso- 
lution of  Parliament  in  1806,  they  again  became 
impatient.* 

»  Lord  Sidmouth's  Life,  ii.  436;  Ann.  Eeg.,  1806,  p.  25;  Lord 
Holland's  Mem.  of  the  Whig  Party,  i.  213,  et  seg^. ;  Butler's  Hist. 
Mem.,  iv.  184-187. 

2  Eutler's  Hist.  Mem.,  iv.  188;  Grattan's  Life,  y.  282-296,  3.34. 


126  Relig iozis  L  iberty. 

At  length  Lord  Grenville,  hoping  to  avert  further 
pressure  on  the  general  question,  resolved  to  redress 
Army  and      a  grievance  which  pressed  heavily  in  time 

INavy  Service  /^    ,  i      i  •  i        i      i 

Bill,  1807.  01  war,  not  upon  Catholics  only,  but  upon 
the  public  service.  By  the  Irish  Act  of  1793, 
Catholics  were  allowed  to  hold  any  commission  in  the 
army  in  Ireland,  up  to  the  rank  of  colonel :  but 
were  excluded  from  the  higher  staff  appointments  of 
commander-in-chief,  master-general  of  the  ordnance, 
and  general  of  the  staff.  As  this  Act  had  not  been 
extended  to  Grreat  Britain,  a  Catholic  officer  in  the 
king's  service,  on  leaving  Ireland,  became  liable  to 
the  penalties  of  the  English  laws.  To  remove  this 
obvious  anomaly,  the  government  at  first  proposed 
to  assimilate  the  laws  of  both  countries,  by  two 
clauses  in  the  Mutiny  Act ;  and  to  this  proposal  the 
king  reluctantly  gave  his  consent.  On  further  con- 
sideration, however,  this  simple  provision  appeared 
inadequate.  The  Irish  Act  applied  to  Catholics 
only,  as  dissenters  had  been  admitted,  by  a  previous 
Act,  to  serve  in  civil  and  military  offices ;  and  it  was 
confined  to  the  army,  as  Ireland  had  no  navy.  The 
exceptions  in  the  Irish  Act  were  considered  unneces- 
sary ;  and  it  was  further  thought  just  to  grant  in- 
dulgence to  soldiers  in  the  exercise  of  their  religion. 
As  thcje  questions  arose,  from  time  to  time,  minis- 
ters communicated  to  the  king  their  correspondence 
with  the  lord-lieutenant,  and  explained  the  vari- 
ations of  their  proposed  measm-e  from  that  of  the 
Irish  Act,  with  the  grounds  upon  which  they  were 
recommended.  Throughout  these  communications 
His  Majesty  did  not  conceal  his  general  dislike  and 


Army  and  Navy  Service  Bill,  1807.      127 

disapprobation  of  the  measure  :  but  was  understood 
to  give  his  reluctant  assent  to  its  introduction  as  a 
separate  bill.^ 

In  this  form  the  bill  was'  introduced  by  Lord 
Howick.  He  explained  that  when  the  Biii  brought 
Irish  Act  of  1793  had  been  passed,  a  simi-  Howick, 

^  '  March  5th, 

lar  measure  had  been  promised  for  Grreat  isot. 
Britain.  That  promise  was  at  length  to  be  fulfilled : 
but  as  it  would  be  unreasonable  to  confine  the 
measure  to  Catholics,  it  was  proposed  to  embrace 
dissenters  in  its  provisions.  The  act  of  1793  had 
applied  to  the  army  only  :  but  it  was  then  distinctly 
stated  that  the  navy  should  be  included  in  the  Act 
of  the  British  Parliament.  If  Catholics  were  ad- 
mitted to  one  branch  of  the  service,  what  possible 
objection  could  there  be  to  their  admission  to  the 
other  ?  He  did  not  propose,  however,  to  continue 
the  restrictions  of  the  Irish  Act,  which  disqualified 
a  Catholic  from  the  offices  of  commander-in-chief, 
master-general  of  the  ordnance,  or  general  on  the 
stafi".  Such  restrictions  were  at  once  unnecessary 
and  injurious.  The  appointment  to  these  high  offices 
was  vested  in  the  crown,  which  would  be  under  no 
obligation  to  appoint  Eoman  Catholics  ;  and  it  was  an 
injury  to  the  public  service  to  exclude  by  law  a  man 
'  who  might  be  called  by  the  voice  of  the  army  and  the 
people '  to  fill  an  office,  for  which  he  had  proved  his 

>  Explanations  of  Lord  Grenville  and  Lord  Howick,  March  26th, 
1807;  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  ix.  231,  261-279;  Lord  Castlereagh's 
Corr.,  iv.  374  ;  Lord  Sidmouth's  Life,  ii.  436 ;  Lord  G-renville's 
Letter,  Feb.  10th,  1807  ;  Court  and  Cabinets  of  Geo.  Ill,  iv.  117; 
Lord  Holland's  Mem.,  ii.  159-199,  App.  270;  Lord  Malmesbni-y's 
Corr,,  iv.  p.  365  ;  Wilberforce's  Life,  iii.  306. 


12  8  Religious  L  iberty. 

fitness  by  distinguished  services.  Lastly,  lie  pro- 
posed to  provide  that  all  who  should  enter  His 
Majesty's  service  should  enjoy  the  '  free  and  unre- 
strained exercise  of  their  religion,  so  far  as  it  did 
not  interfere  with  their  military  duties.'^  Mr. 
Spencer  Perceval  sounded  the  note  of  alarm  at 
these  proposals,  which,  in  his  opinion,  involved  all 
the  principles  of  complete  emancipation.  If  mili- 
tary equality  were  conceded,  how  could  civil  equality 
be  afterwards  resisted  ?  His  apprehensions  were 
shared  by  some  other  members :  but  the  bill  was 
9.11owed  to  be  introduced  without  opposition. 

Its  further  progress,  however,  was  suddenly 
withdraM'ai  ^rrcstod  by  the  king,  who  refused  to  admit 
fJtot^^  Catholics  to  the  staff,  and  to  include  dis- 
ministers.  ^^^^^^^  '^^  the  provisious  of  the  bill.2  He 
declared  that  his  previous  assent  had  been  given  to 
the  simple  extension  of  the  Irish  Act  to  Grreat 
Britain ;  and  he  would  agree  to  nothing  more. 
Again  a  ministry  fell  under  the  difficulties  of  the 
Catholic  question.^  The  embarrassments  of  minis- 
ters had  undoubtedly  been  great.  They  had  desired 
to  maintain  their  own  character  and  consistency, 
and  to  conciliate  the  Catholics,  without  shocking 
the  well-known  scruples  of  the  king.  Their  scheme 
was  just  and  moderate  :  it  was  open  to  no  rational 
objection:  but  neither  in  the  preparation  of  the 
measure  itself,  nor  in  their  communications  witli 
the  king,  can  they  be  acquitted  of  errors  which  were 

'  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  ix.  2-7.  =  lUd.,  149,  173. 

=•  The  constitutional  questions  involved  in  their  removal  from  ofifico 
have  been  related  elsewhere ;  Vol.  I.  p.  105. 


Catholic  Clahns,  1 808-1810.  129 

turned  against  themselves  and  tiie  unlucky  cause 
they  had  espoused.^ 

Again  were  the  hopes  of  the  Catholics  wrecked, 
and    with    them    the  hopes  of  a  liberal  Anti-catiio- 

lie  senti- 

pfovernment  in  Ensrland.    An  anti-Catholic  ments  of  the 
°  *^  new  minis- 

administration  was  formed  under  the  Duke  ters. 

of  Portland  and  Mr.  Perceval ;  and  cries  of '  No 
Popery,'  and  '  Church  and  King,'  were  raised 
throughout  the  land.^  Mr.  Perceval  in  his  address 
to  the  electors  of  Northampton,  on  vacating  his  seat, 
took  credit  for  '  coming  forward  in  the  service  of 
his  sovereign,  and  endeavouring  to  stand  by  him  at 
this  important  crisis,  when  he  is  making  so  firm  and 
so  necessary  a  stand  for  the  religious  establishment 
of  the  country.' 3  The  Duke  of  Portland  wrote  to 
the  University  of  Oxford,  of  which  he  was  Chancel- 
lor, desiring  them  to  petition  against  the  Catholic 
Bill ;  and  the  Duke  of  Cumberland,  Chancellor  of 
the  University  of  Dublin,  sought  petitions  from 
that  University.  No  pains  were  spared  to  arouse 
the  fears  and  prejudices  of  Protestants.  Thus  Mr. 
Perceval  averred  that  the  measure  recently  with- 
drawn would  not  have  '  stopped  short  till  it  had 
brought  Eoman  Catholic  bishops  to  the  House  of 
Lords.'*     Such  cries  as  these  were  re-echoed  at  the 

»  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  ix.  231, 247,  261,  340,  &c. ;  Lord  Holland's 
Mem.,  ii.  160,  et  seq. ;  App.  to  toI.  ii.  270 ;  Lord  Malmesbury'sCorr., 
iv.  367,  379;  Lord  Sidmouth's  Life,  ii.  448-472;  Bulwer's  Life  of 
Lord  Palmerston,  i.  62-76. 

2  Mr.  Henry  Erskine  said  to  the  Duchess  of  Grordon:  'It  was 
much  to  be  lamented  that  poor  Lord  George  did  not  live  in  these 
times,  when  he  would  have  stx)od  a  chance  of  being  in  the  cabinet, 
instead  of  being  in  Newgate.' — Bomilly's  Mem.,  ii.  193, 

^  Komilly's  Mem.,  ii.  192. 

••  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  ix.  315. 
VOL.  III.  K 


1 30  Religious  Liberty. 

elections.  An  ultra-Prote§tant  Parliament  was  as- 
sembled ;  and  the  Catholic  cause  -was  hopeless.^ 

The  Catholics  of  Ireland,  however,  did  not  suffer 
Eoman  their  claims  to  be  forgotten :  but  by  fre- 
pSo^,  quent  petitions,  and  the  earnest  support  of 
■^^^^'  their  friends,  continued  to  keep  alive  the 

interest  of  the  Catholic  question,  in  the  midst  of 
more  engrossing  subjects.  But  discussions,  however 
able,  which  were  unfruitful  of  results,  can  claim  no 
more  than  a  passing  notice.  Petitions  were  fully 
cattoiic  discussed  in  both  Houses  in  1808.^  And 
presented  again,  iu  1810,  Earl  Grrey  presented  two 
Grey,  petitions  from  Eoman  Catholics  in  Enaj- 

Teb.  22nd,        ^  ° 

•  isio.  land,  complaining  that  they  were  demed 

many  privileges  which  were  enjoyed  by  their  Eoman 
Catholic  brethren  in  other  parts  of  the  empire.  He 
stated  that  in  Canada  Eoman  Catholics  were  eligible 
to  all  offices,  in  common  with  their  Protestant  fel- 
low-subjects. In  Ireland,  they  were  allowed  to  act 
as  magistrates,  to  become  members  of  lay  corpora- 
tions, to  take  degrees  at  Trinity  College,  to  vote  at 
elections,  and  to  attain  to  every  rank  in  the  army 
except  that  of  general  of  the  staff.  In  England, 
they  could  not  be  included  in  the  commission  of 
the  peace,  nor  become  members  of  corporations, 
were  debarred  from  taking  degrees  at  the  univer- 

*  Lord  Malmesbury  says :  *  The  spirit  of  the  whole  country  is 
with  the  king ;  and  the  idea  of  the  church  being  in  danger  (perhaps 
not  quite  untrue),  makes  Lord  G-renville  and  the  Foxites  most  un- 
popular.'— Corr.,  iv.  394. 

-  Lords'  Debates,  May  27th,  1808;  Commons'  Debates,  May  25th, 
1808;  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xi.  1,  30,  489,  549-638,  643-694; 
Grattan's  Life,  r.  376. 


Catholic  Claims^  1 808-1810.  131 

sities,  and  could  not  legally  hold  any  rank  in   the 
army.^      The  Eoman  Catholics  of  Ireland  Jir.Grat- 
also   presented  petitions  to  the  House  of  motion, 

May  18th, 

Commons   through   Mr.   Grrattan,  in  this  isiu. 
session.^     But  his  motion  to  refer  them  to  a  com- 
mittee was  defeated,  after  a  debate  of  three  nights, 
by  a  majority  of  one  hundred  and  four.^ 

In  the  same  session,  Lord  Donoughmore  moved  to 
refer  several  petitions  from  the  Eoman  Ca-  ^^^.^ 
tholics  of  Ireland  to  a  committee  of  the  ^^^f^' 
House  of  Lords.  But  as  Lord  Orenville  had  S^Tth, 
declined,  with  the  concurrence  of  Lord  Grrey,  ^^^^* 
to  bring  forward  the  Catholic  claims,  the  question  was 
not  presented  imder  favourable  circumstances ;  and 
the  motion  was  lost  by  a  majority  of  eighty-six.'* 

One   other  demonstration  was  made  during  this 
session  in  support  of  the  Catholic  cause.  Eari  Grey's 
Lord  Grrey,  in  his  speech  on  the  state  of  the  state 
the  nation,  adverted  to  the  continued  post-  nation, 

■^  June  13th, 

ponement  of  concessions  to  the  Catholics,  isio. 
as  a  source  of  danger  and  weakness  to  the  state  in 
the  conduct  of  the  war  ;  and  appealed  to  ministers 
to  '  unite  the  hearts  and  hands  of  all  classes  of  the 
people  in  defence  of  their  common  country.'  An 
allusion  to  this  question  was  also  made  in  the  address 
which  he  proposed  to  the  crown.^ 


»  Hans.  Deb.,  Ist  Ser.,  xv.  503. 

2  Feb.  27th,  ^id.,  631. 

3  Ibid.,  xvii.  17,  183,  235.    Ayes,  109;  Noes,  213.    Grattan's 
Life,  V.  410. 

*  Conteuts,  68 ;  Non-contents,  154.    Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xviu 
353-440. 

*  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xvii.      3,  577. 

K  2 


132  Religious  Liberty. 

In  the  autumn  of  this  year,  an  event  fraught  with 
Approach  saduess  to  the  nation,  once  more  raised  the 
resrency.  hopes  of  the  CathoHcs.  The  aged  king  was 
stricken  with  his  last  infirmity;  and  a  new  political 
era  was  opening,  full  of  promise  to  their  cause. 


133 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

PISTOET  OF  CATHOLIC  CIAIMS  FEOM  THE  EEGENCT: — MEASTJEES  FOB 
THE  BELIEF  OF  DISSENTEES  : — MAEEIAGES  OF  CATHOLICS  AND  DIS- 
SENTERS: — REPEAL   OF   THE    COEPOEATION   AND  TEST  ACTS  IN  1828  : 

PASSING   OF   THE   CATHOLIC   RELIEF  ACT   IN    1829: — ITS  RESULTS  : 

— QUAKERS,   MORAVIANS,   AND   SEPARATISTS  :— JEWISH  DISABILITIES. 

The  regency  augured  well  for  the  commencement  of 
a  more  liberal  policy  in  church  and  state.  Hopego^ 
The  venerable  monarch,  whose  sceptre  was  gencTdis- 
now  wielded  by  a  feebler  hand,  had  twice  ^pp°^"*^'^- 
trampled  upon  the  petitions  of  his  Catholic  subjects ; 
and,  by  his  resolution  and  influence,  had  united 
against  them  ministers.  Parliament,  and  people. 
It  seemed  no  idle  hope  that  Tory  ministers  would 
now  be  supplanted  by  statesmen  earnest  in  the 
cause  of  civil  and  religious  liberty,  whose  policy 
would  no  longer  be  thwarted  by  the  influence  of 
the  crown.  The  prince  himself,  once  zealous  in  the 
Catholic  cause,  had,  indeed,  been  for  some  years  in- 
constant,— if  not  untrue, — to  it.  His  change  of 
opinion,  however,  might  be  due  to  respect  for  his 
royal  father,  or  the  political  embarrassments  of  the 
question.  None  could  suspect  him  of  cherishing 
intractable  religious  scruples.^  Assuredly  he  would 
not  reject  the  liberal  counsels  of  the  ministers  of  his 

'  Moore's  Life  of  Sheridan,  ii.  333  ;  Lord  Brougham's  Statesmen, 
i.  186 ;  Lord  Holland's  Mem.,  ii.  196. 


1 34  Religious  Liberty. 

choice.  But  these  visions  were  soon  to  collapse  and 
vanish,  like  bubbles  in  the  air;^  and  the  weary 
struggle  was  continued,  with  scarcely  a  change  in 
its  prospects. 

The  first  year  of  the  regency,  however,  was  marked 
Freedom  of    by  the  cousummation  of  one  act  of  tolera- 

■worship  to  .  _  . , ,  .     , 

Boman         tiou.     The  Grrenville  ministry  had  failed 

Catholic  *' 

soldiers.  to  sccure  freedom  of  religious  worship  to 
Catholic  soldiers  by  legislation :  ^  but  they  had  par- 
tially secured  that  object  by  a  circular  to  command- 
ing officers.  Orders  to  the  same  effect  had  since  been 
annually  issued  by  the  commander-in-chief.  The 
articles  of  war,  however,  recognised  no  right  in  the 
soldier  to  absent  himself  from  divine  service ;  and 
in  ignorance  or  neglect  of  these  orders,  soldiers  had 
been  punished  for  refusing  to  attend  the  services  of 
the  established  church.  To  repress  such  an  abuse, 
the  commander-in-chief  issued  general  orders,  in 
January  1811  ;  and  Mr.  Pamell  afterwards  proposed 
March  11th  ^  clausc  in  the  Mutiny  Bill,  to  give  legal 
^^^^-  effect  to  them.     The  clause  was  not  agreed 

to :  but,  in  the  debate,  no  doubt  was  left  that,  by 
the  regulations  of  the  service,  full  toleration  would 
henceforth  be  enjoyed  by  Catholic  soldiers,  in  the 
exercise  of  their  religion.^ 

Another  measure,  affecting  dissenters,  was  con- 
Protestant  ccivcd  iu  a  somcwhat  different  spirit.  Lord 
SinlteS^  Sidmouth  complained  of  the  faciUty  with 
Bill,  1811.  ^iiich  dissenting  ministers  were  able  to 
obtain  certificates,  under  the  Act  of  1779,'*  without 

»  Vol.  I.  119.  2  Swpra,  p.  128, 

•  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xix.  350.  ■*  Sujpra,  p.  94. 


Dissenting  Ministers  Bill,  1 8 1 1 .        155 

any  proof  of  their  fitness  to  preach,  or  of  there  being 
any  congregation  requiring  their  ministrations. 
Some  had  been  admitted  who  could  not  even  read 
and  write,  but  were  prepared  to  preach  by  inspira- 
tion. One  of  the  abuses  resulting  from  this  facility 
was  the  exemption  of  so  many  preachers  from  serv- 
ing on  juries,  and  from  other  civil  duties.  To  cor- 
rect these  evils,  he  proposed  certain  securities,  of 
which  the  principal  was  a  certificate  of  fitness  from 
six  reputable  householders,  of  the  same  persuasion 
as  the  minister  seeking  a  licence  to  preach.^  ^^^  ^^^^ 
His  bill  met  with  little  favour.  It  was,  at  ^^^^• 
best,  a  trivial  measure :  but  its  policy  was  in  the 
wrong  direction.  It  ill  becomes  a  state,  which  dis- 
owns any  relations  with  dissenters,  to  intermeddle 
with  their  discipline.  The  dissenters  rose  up  against 
the  bill ;  and  before  the  second  reading,  the  House 
was  overwhelmed  with  their  petitions.  The  govern- 
ment discouraged  it :  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
counselled  its  withdrawal :  the  leading  peers  of  the 
liberal  party  denounced  it ;  and  Lord  Sidmouth, 
standing  almost  alone,  was  obliged  to  allow  his  ill- 
advised  measure  to  be  defeated,  without  a  division.^ 
Lord  Sidmouth's  bill  had  not  only  alarmed  the 
dissenters,  but  had  raised  legal  doubts,  pro^estant 
which  exposed  them  to  further  molesta-  SSSlS^ 
tion.^  And,  in  the  next  year,  another  bill  ■^'"'  ^^^^* 
was  passed,  with  the  grateful  approval  of  the  dis- 
senters, by  which  they  were  relieved  from  the  oaths 

1  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xix.  1128-1140. 

2  Ibid.,  XX.  233  ;  Lord  Sidmouth's  Life,  iii.  38-65 ;  Brook's  Hist,  of 
Kelip^.  Lib.,  ii.  386. 

"  Bwok's  Hist,  of  Eelig.  Lib.,  ii.  394. 


1^6  Religious  Liberty. 

and  declaration  required  by  the  Toleration  Act, 
and  the  Act  of  1779,  and  from  other  vexatious  re- 
TJnitarians'  strictious.^  And  in  the  following  year, 
relief,  1813.    jy^^  ^^  g^^-^j^  obtained  for  Unitarians  that 

relief  which,  many  years  before,  Mr.  Fox  had  vainly 
«ought  from  the  legislature.^ 

JSTothing  distinguished  the  tedious  annals  of  the 
cattiouc  Catholic  question  in  1811,  but  a  motion, 
May  31st',      in  ouo   House,  by  Mr.  Grrattan,  and,   in 

June  18th,  '       -^  '  ' 

1811.  the  other,  by  Lord  Donoughmore,  which 

met  with  their  accustomed  fate.^  But,  in  1812,  the 
Catholic  aspect  of  the  Catholic  question  was,  in  some 
qugtioD,  degree,  changed.  The  claims  of  the  Ca- 
stateof  tholics,  always  associated  with  the  peace 
Ireland.  ^^^  good  govcmment  of  Ireland,  were  now 
Jan.  31st.  "brought  forward,  in  the  form  of  a  motion, 
by  Lord  Fitzwilliam,  for  a  committee  on  the  state 
of  Ireland ;  and  were  urged  more  on  the  groimd  of 
state  policy  than  of  justice.  The  debate  was  chiefly 
remarkable  for  a  wise  and  statesmanlike  speech  of 
the  Marquess  Wellesley.  The  motion  was  lost  by 
a  majority  of  eighty-three.'*  A  few  days  afterwards, 
Feb.  3rd.  a  similar  motion  was  made  in  the  House 
of  Commons,  by  Lord  Morpeth.  Mr.  Canning  op- 
posed it  in  a  masterly  speech, — more  encouraging 
to  the  cause  than  the  support  of  most  other  men, 

1  52  Geo.  III.  c.  165;  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxiii.  994,  1105, 
1247  ;  Lord  Sidmouth's  Life,  iii.  66;  Brook's  Hist,  of  Relig.  Lib., 
ii.  394. 

-  53  Geo.  III.  c.  160 ;  Brook's  Hist,  of  Eelig.  Lib.,  ii.  395. 

'  Ayes,  83  ;  Noes,  146,  in  the  Commons,  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xx. 
369-427.  Contents,  62 ;  Non-contents,  121,  in  the  Lords.  Hans. 
Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xs.  645-685  ;  Grattan's  Life,  v.  376. 

*  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxi.  408-483.  The  House  adjourned  at 
half-past  6  in  the  morning. 


Catholic  Claims,  1812.  137 

Objecting  to  the  motion  in  point  of  time  alone,  he 
urged  every  abstract  argument  in  its  favour ;  de- 
clared that  the  policy  of  enfranchisement  must  be 
progressive ;  and  that  since  the  obstacle  caused  by 
the  king's  conscientious  scruples  had  been  removed, 
it  had  become  the  duty  of  ministers  to  undertake 
the  settlement  of  a  question,  vital  to  the  interests 
of  the  empire.^  The  general  tone  of  the  discussion 
was  also  encouraging  to  the  Catholic  cause ;  and 
after  two  nights'  debate,  the  motion  was  lost  by  a 
majority  of  ninety-four, — a  number  increased  by  the 
belief  that  the  motion  implied  a  censure  upon  the 
executive  government  of  Ireland.^ 

Another  aspect  in  the  Catholic  cause  is  also  ob- 
servable in  this  year.  Not  only  were  peti-  pj-otestant 
tions  from  the  Catholics  of  England  and  sympathy. 
Ireland  more  numerous  and  imposing :  but  Protest- 
ant noblemen,  gentlemen  of  landed  property,  clergy, 
commercial  capitalists,  officers  in  the  army  and 
navy,  and  the  inhabitants  of  large  towns,  added 
their  prayers  to  those  of  their  Catholic  fellow- 
countrymen.3  Even  the  universities  of  Oxford  and 
Cambridge,  which  presented  petitions  against  the 
Catholic  claims,  were  much  divided  in  opinion  ;  and 
minorities,  considerable  in  academic  rank,  learning, 
and  numbers,  were  ranged  on  the  other  side."* 

Thus  fortified,  motions  in  support  of  the  Catholic 


'  It  -was  in  this  speech  that  he  uttered  his  celebrated  exclamation, 
♦  repeal  the  Union !  restore  the  Heptarchy  ! ' 

-  Hans..  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxi.  494,  605.  The  House  adjourned  at 
half-past  5. 

s  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxii.  452,  478,  482-706,  &c. 

*  Ihid.,  462,  607  ;  Grattan's  Life,  v.  467. 


i;^S  Religious  Liberty. 

claims  were  renewed  in  both  Houses;  and  beins: 
Lord  ^^^  -^^^^  from  any  implication  of  censure 

So?e's^^'  i-^pon  the  government,  were  offered  under 
Apriflist,  more  favourable  auspices.  That  of  the  Earl 
^^^^"  of  Donoughmore,  in  the  House  of  Lords, 

elicited  from  the  Duke  of  Sussex  an  elaborate 
speech  in  favour  of  the  Catholic  claims,  which  His 
Eoyal  Highness  afterwards  edited  with  many  learned 
notes.  Who  that  heard  the  arguments  of  Lord 
Wellesley  and  Lord  Grrenville,  could  have  believed 
that  the  settlement  of  this  great  question  was  yet  to 
be  postponed  for  many  years  ?  Lord  G-renville's 
warning  was  like  a  prophecy.  '  I  ask  not,'  he  said, 
'  what  in  this  case  will  be  your  ultimate  decision. 
It  is  easily  anticipated.  We  know,  and  it  has  been 
amply  shown  in  former  instances, — the  cases  of 
America  and  of  Ireland  have  but  too  well  proved  it, 
— how  precipitately  necessity  extorts  what  power 
has  pertinaciously  refused.  We  shall  finally  yield 
to  these  petitions.  No  man  doubts  it.  Let  us  not 
delay  the  concession,  until  it  can  neither  be  graced 
by  spontaneous  kindness,  nor  limited  by  delibera- 
tive wisdom.'  The  motion  was  defeated  by  a  ma- 
jority of  seventy-two.^ 

Mr.  Grrattan  proposed  a  similar  motion  in  the 
Mr.  Grat-  Houso  of  Commous,  in  a  speech  more  than 
motion,  usually  camcst  and  impassioned.  In  this 
1812.  '  debate,  Mr.  Brougham  raised  his  voice  in 
support  of  the  Catholic  cause, — a  voice  ever  on  the 
side  of  freedom.^     And  now  Mr.  Canning  supported 

*  Contents,  102;  Non-contents,  174.     Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxii. 
509-703.     The  House  divided  at  5  in  the  morning. 
2  Mr.  Brougham  had  entered  Parliament  in  1810. 


Catholic  Claims,  1812.  139 

the  motion,  not  only  with  his  eloquence,  but  with  his 
vote ;  and  continued  henceforth  one  of  the  foremost 
advocates  of  the  Catholic  claims.  After  two  nights' 
debate,  Mr.  Grrattan's  motion  was  submitted  to  the 
vote  of  an  unusual  number  of  members,  assembled 
by  a  call  of  the  House,  and  lost  by  a  majority  of 
eighty-five.^ 

But  this  session  promised  more  than  the  barren 
triumphs  of  debate.  On  the  death  of  Mr.  Perceval, 
the  Marquess  AVellesley  being  charged  with  the 
formation  of  a  new  administration,  assumed,  as  the 
very  basis  of  his  negotiation,  the  final  adjustment  of 
the  Catholic  claims.  The  negotiation  failed,  in- 
deed :  ^  but  the  Marquess  and  his  friends,  encouraged 
by  so  unprecedented  a  concession  from  the  throne, 
sought  to  pledge  Parliament  to  the  consideration  of 
this  question  in  the  next  session.     First.  Mr.  can- 

.  '    ning's 

Mr.  Canning,  in  the  House  of  Commons,  motion, 

°'  '    June  22nd, 

gained  an  unexampled  victory.  For  years  1812. 
past,  every  motion  favom-able  to  this  cause  had  been 
opposed  by  large  majorities  :  but  now  his  motion  for 
the  consideration  of  the  laws  affecting  His  Majesty's 
Eoman  Catholic  subjects  in  Great  Britain  and  Ire- 
land, was  carried  by  the  extraordinary  majority  of 
one  hundred  and  twenty-nine.^ 

Shortly  after  this  most  encouraging  resolution,  the 
Marquess  Wellesley  made  a  similar    mo-  Lord 

Wellesley's 

tion,  in  the  House  of   Lords,'*  where  the  motion. 

'  '  July  1st, 

decision  was  scarcely  less  remarkable.    The  1812. 

'  Ayes,  215  ;  Noes,  300.  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxii.  728, 860.  The 
House  adjourned  at  half-past  6  in  the  morning. 

2  Supra,  Vol.  I.  125. 

3  Ayes,  235  ;  Noes,  129.     Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.  xxiii.  633-710. 
*  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxiii.  711,  814. 


140  Religious  Liberty, 

lord  chancellor  had  moved  the  previous  question, 
and  even  upon  that  indefinite  and  evasive  issue, 
the  motion  was  only  lost  by  a  single  vote.^ 

Another  circumstance,  apparently  favourable   to 
The  Catholic  the  causc,  was  also  disclosed.     The  Earl  of 

disabilities  •  i    *      /» 

an  open        Livcrpool  s     administration,     instead     01 

question  in  -^ 

1812,  uniting  their  whole  force  against  the 
Catholic  cause,  agreed  that  it  should  be  an  '  open 
question ; '  and  this  freedom  of  action,  on  the  part 
of  individual  members  of  the  government,  was  first 
exercised  in  these  debates.  The  introduction  of 
this  new  element  into  the  contest,  was  a  homage  to 
the  justice  and  reputation  of  the  cause :  but  its 
promises  were  illusory.  Had  the  statesmen  who 
espoused  the  Catholic  claims  steadfastly  refused  to 
act  with  ministers  who  continued  to  oppose  them,  it 
may  be  doubted  whether  any  competent  ministry 
could  much  longer  have  been  formed,  upon  a  rigo- 
rous policy  of  exclusion.  The  influence  of  the 
crown  and  church  might,  for  some  time,  have  sus- 
tained such  a  ministry :  but  the  inevitable  conflict 
of  principles  would  sooner  have  been  precipitated. 

Alarmed  by  the  improved  position  of  the  Catholic 
Catholic       question   in   Parliament,   the   clersry   and 

claims,  ^  ^  ?  &J 

1812-13.  strong  Protestant  party  hastened  to  re- 
monstrate against  concession.  The  Catholics  re- 
sponded by  a  renewal  of  their  reiterated  appeals. 
Mr.Grat-  In  February  1813,  Mr.  Grrattan,  in  pur- 
Miotion,        suance  of  the  resolution  of  the  previous 

Feb.  25th,  ^ 

1813.  session,  moved  the  immediate  considera- 

*  Non-contents,  126 ;  Contents,  125.     Hans.  Deb,,  1st  Ser.,  xxiii. 
814-868. 


Catholic  Claims,  1813.  141 

tion  of  the  laws  affecting  the  Eoman  Catholics,  in  a 
comniittee  of  the  whole  House.  He  was  supported 
by  Lord  Castlereagh,  and  opposed  by  Mr.  Peel. 
After  four  nights'  debate,  rich  in  maiden  speeches^ 
well  suited  to  a  theme  which  had  too  often  tried  the 
resources  of  more  practised  speakers,  the  motion  wa» 
carried  by  a  majority  of  forty  * 

In  committee,  Mr.  Grrattan  proposed  a  resolution 
affirming  that  it  was  advisable  to  remove  ^^^^j^  ^^^^ 
the  civil  and  military  disqualifications  of  -^^^^^ 
the  Catholics,  with  such  exceptions  as  may  be  neces- 
sary for  preserving  the  Protestant  succession,  the 
church  of  England  and  Ireland,  and  the  church  of 
Scotland.  Mr.  Speaker  Abbot,  free,  for  the  first 
time,  to  speak  upon  this  occasion,  opposed  the 
resolution.  It  was  agreed  to  by  a  majority  of  sixty- 
seven.^ 

The  bill  founded  upon  this  resolution  provided 
for  the   admission  of  Catholics  to  either  Mr.Grat- 

tan's  bill. 

House  of  Parliament,  on  taking  one  oath,  isis. 
instead  of  the  oaths  of  allegiance,  abjuration  and 
supremacy,  and  the  declarations  against  transubstan- 
tiation  and  the  invocation  of  saints.  On  taking  this 
oath,  and  without  receiving  the  sacrament.  Catho- 
lics were  also  entitled  to  vote  at  elections,  to  hold 
any  civil  and  military  office  under  the  crown,  except 
that  of  lord-chancellor  or  lord-lieutenant  of  Ireland, 
and  any  lay  corporate  office.  No  Catholic  was  to  ad- 
vise the  crown,  in  the  disposal  of  church  patronage. 

'  Ayes,  264 ;  Noes,  224.    Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxiv.  747,  849, 
879,  985. 
-  Ayes,  186 ;  Noes,  119.    Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxiv.  1194-1248. 


J  4  2  Religious  L  iberty. 

Every  person  exercising  spiritual  functions  in  the 
churcli  of  Eome  was  required  to  take  this  oath, 
as  well  as  another,  by  which  he  bound  himself  to 
approve  of  none  but  loyal  bishops ;  and  to  limit  his 
intercom'se  with  the  pope  to  matters  purely  eccle- 
siastical. It  was  further  provided,  that  none  but 
persons  born  in  the  United  Kingdom,  or  of  British 
parents,  and  resident  therein,  should  be  qualified  for 
the  episcopal  office.^ 

After  the  second  reading,^  several  amendments 
were  introduced  by  consent,^  mainly  for  the  purpose 
of  establisliing  a  government  control  over  the  Eoman 
Catholic  bishops,  and  for  regulating  the  relations 
of  the  Eoman  Catholic  church  with  the  see  of 
Eome.  These  latter  provisions  were  peculiarly  dis- 
tasteful to  the  Eoman  Catholic  body,  who  resented 
the  proposal  as  a  surrender  of  the  spiritual  free- 
dom of  their  church,  in  exchange  for  their  o^n  civil 
liberties. 

The  course  of  the  bill,  however, — thus  far  pros- 
Bin  de-  perous, — ^was  soon  brought  to  an  abrupt 
May^24th  termination.  The  indefatigable  speaker, 
■^^^^*  again  released  from  his  chair,  moved,  in 

the  first  clause,  the  omission  of  the  words,  '  to  sit 
and  vote  in  either  House  of  Parliament ; '  and 
carried  his  amendment  by  a  majority  of  four.'*  The 
bill  having  thus   lost  its  principal  provision,  was 


»  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxv.  1107  ;  Peel's  Mem.,  i.  354. 

2  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxvi.  171 ;  Ayes,  245  ;  Noes,  203. 

'  The  Bill  as  thus  amended  is  printed  in  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser,, 
xxvi.  271. 

^  Ibid.,  312-361;  Ayes,  247;  Noes,  251;  Grattan's  Life,  v. 
489-496. 


Catholic  Claims^  1813-1817.  143 

immediately  abandoned ;  and  the  Catholic  question 
was  nearly  as  far  from  a  settlement  as  ever.^ 

This  session,  however,  was  not  wholly  unfruitful 
of  benefit  to  the  Catholic  cause.    The  Duke  Roman 

,.  -..-r      /^  -n  1     -I    •  •  -1  .-i-i  Catholic 

of  Norfolk  succeeded  m  passing  a  bill,  en-  officers' 
abling  Irish  Eoman  Catholics  to  hold  all  ^iii,  1813. 
such  civil  or  military  offices  in  England,  as  by  the 
Act  of  1793  they  were  entitled  to  hold  in  Ireland. 
It  removed  one  of  the  obvious  anomalies  of  the  law, 
which  had  been  admitted  in  1807,  even  by  the  king 
himself.^ 

This  measure  was  followed,  in  1817,  by  the  Mili- 
tary and  Naval  Officers'  Oaths  Bill,  which  Military  and 
virtually  opened  all  ranks  in  the  army  and  officers' 

-r.  ^      1     T  1   -r^.  ,    Oaths  Bill, 

navy  to  Roman  Catholics  and  Dissenters.^  1817. 
Introduced  by  Lord  Melville  simply  as  a  measure  of 
regulation,  it  escaped  the  animadversion  of  the 
Protestant  party, — ever  on  the  watch  to  prevent 
further  concessions  to  Catholics.  A  measure,  de- 
nounced in  1807  as  a  violation  of  the  constitution 
and  the  king's  coronation  oath,  was  now  agreed  to 
with  the  acquiescence  of  all  parties.  The  church 
was  no  longer  in  danger ;  '  no  popery '  was  not  even 

*  The  speaker,  elated  by  his  victory,  could  not  forbear  the  further 
satisfaction  of  alluding  to  the  failure  of  the  bill,  in  his  speech  to  the 
Prince  Kegent,  at  the  end  of  the  session, — an  act  of  indiscretion,  if 
not  disorder,  which  placed  him  in  the  awkward  position  of  defending 
himself,  in  the  chair,  from  a  proposed  vote  of  censure.  From  this 
embarrassment  he  was  delivered  by  the  kindness  of  his  friends,  and 
the  good  feeling  of  the  House,  rather  than  by  the  completeness  of  his 
own  defence. — Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxvi.  1224 ;  Ibid.,  xxvii.  46/> ; 
Lord  Colchester's  Diary,  ii.  453-458,  483-496;  Eomilly's  Life,  iii. 
133. 

•'  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxvi.  639;  53  Geo.  IIL  c.  128. 

3  57  Geo.  III.  c.  92  ;  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xsxvi.  1208  ;  Ibid.,  xl. 
24  ;  Butler's  Hist.  Mem.,  iv.  257. 


144  Religious  Liberty, 

whispered.  '  It  was  some  consolation  for  him  to 
reflect,'  said  Earl  Grey,  '  that  what  was  resisted,  at 
one  period,  and  in  the  hands  of  one  man,  as  dange- 
rous and  disastrous,  was  adopted  at  another,  and 
from  a  different  quarter,  as  wise  and  salutary.'  * 

In  1815,  the  Eoman  Catholic  body  in  Ireland 
Catholic  being  at  issue  with  their  parliamentary 
1815-1817.  friends,  upon  the  question  of  'securities,' 
their  cause  languished  and  declined.^  Nor  in  the 
two  following  years,  did  it  meet  with  any  signal 
successes.^ 

In  1819,  the  general  question  of  Catholic  emanei- 
Deciaration  P^^i^u  fouud  no  favouT  in  either  House  ;  ** 
tfamubstan-  ^^^  ^^  ^^^^  ^'^.'A  Grey  Submitted  a  modi- 
May°26tii,  ^^^  mcasure  of  relief.  He  introduced  a 
1819.  -j^^-^-^  for  abrogating  the  declarations  against 

the  doctrines  of  transubstantiation  and  the  invoca- 
tion of  saints,  required  to  be  taken  ^  by  civil  and 
military  ofi&cers,  and  members  of  botli  Houses  of 
Parliament.^  This  measure  was  offered  on  the 
ground  that  these  declarations  were  simply  tests  of 
faith  and  doctrine,  and  independent  of  any  question 
of  foreign  spiritual  supremacy.  It  had  been  ad- 
mitted,  on   all   hands,   that   no    one   ought  to  be 

»  June  lOth,  1819;  Hans.  Deb.,  lstSer.,3d.  1042. 

2  May  18th  and  30th;  June  8th,  1815;  Hans.  Deh.,  1st  Ser., 
xxxi.  258,  474,  666. 

'  May  21st  and  June  21st,  1816 ;  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxxiv. 
655,  1239;  May  9th  and  16th,  1817;  /<Wf?.,  xxxri.  301,  600;  Mr. 
Grattan's  motion  on  May  21st,  1816,  was  the  only  one  carried, — by 
a  majority  of  31. 

*  Commons,  May  4th,  Ayes,  241 ;  ISToes,  243.  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser., 
xl.  6;  Lords,  May  17th,  Contents,  106;  Non-contents,  147.  Hans. 
Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xl.  3S6. 

^  By  25  Car.  II;  c.  2  ;  and  30  Car.  II.  st.  2,  c.  2. 

«  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xl.  748. 


Death  of  Grattan.  145 

excluded  from  office  merely  on  account  of  Lis  re- 
ligious   belief, — and   that   nothing   would   warrant 
such  exclusion,  but  poKtical  tenets  connected  with 
religion  which  were,  at  the  same  time,  dangerous  to 
the  state.     The  oath  of  supremacy  guarded  against 
such  tenets :  but  to  stigmatise  purely  religious  doc- 
trines as  '  idolatrous  and  superstitious,'  was  a  relic 
of  offensive  legislation,  contrary  to  the  policy  of  later 
times.     As  a  practical  measure  of  relief  the  bill  was 
wholly  inoperative :  but  even  this  theoretical  legis- 
lation,— this  assertion  of  a  principle  without  legal 
consequences, — was  resisted,  as  fraught  with  danger  to 
the  constitution ;  and  the  second  reading  of  the  bill 
was  accordingly  denied  by  a  majority  of  fifty-nine.' 
The   weary   struggle   for   Catholic   emancipation 
survived  its  foremost  champion.     In  1820,  pe^tiiof 
Mr.  Grattan  was  about  to  resume  his  exer-  ^^^"•'^"• 
tions  in  the  cause,  when  death  overtook  him.     His 
last  words  bespoke  his  earnest  convictions  and  sin- 
cerity.    '  I  wished,'  said  he,  '  to  go  to  the  House  of 
Commons  to  testify  with  my  last  breath  my  opinions 
on  the  question  of  Catholic   emancipation :  but  X 
cannot.     The  hand  of  death  is  upon  me.'     .... 
'  I  wish  the  question  to  be  settled,  because  I  believe 
it  to  be  essential  to  the  permanent  tranquillity  and 
happiness  of  the  country,  which  are,  in  fact,  iden- 
tified with  it.'     He  also  counselled  the  Catholics  to 
keep  aloof  from  the  democratic  agitations  of  that 
period.^ 

'  Contents,  82;  Non-contents,  141.  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser„  xl. 
1034. 

2  Statement  by  Mr.  Becber,  Jiine  14tb,  1820 ;  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd 
Ser.,  1065;  Life  of  Grattan  by  bis  Son,  v.  541,  544,549. 

VOL.    III.  L 


146  Religious  Libe^^ty, 

The  mantle  of  Mr.  Grrattan  descended  upon  a 
Mr  piun-  fellow-countryman  of  rare  eloquence  and 
Feb!  28th,  ability, — Mr.  Plunket,  who  had  already 
■^^^^'  distinguished   himself  in  the  same  cause. 

His  first  efforts  were  of  happy  augury.  In  February 
1821,  in  a  speech  replete  with  learning,  argument, 
and  eloquence,  he  introduced  the  familiar  motion 
for  a  committee  on  the  Eoman  Catholic  oaths,  which 
was  carried  by  a  majority  of  six.^  His  bill,  founded 
upon  the  resolutions  of  this  committee,^  provided  for 
the  abrogation  of  the  declarations  against  transub- 
stantiation  and  the  invocation  of  saints,  and  a  legal 
interpretation  of  the  oath  of  supremacy,  in  a  sense 
not  obnoxious  to  the  consciences  of  Catholics.  On 
the  16th  of  March  the  bill,  after  an  animated  de- 
bate, illustrated  by  one  of  Mr.  Canning's  happiest 
efforts,  and  generally  characterised  by  moderation, 
was  read  a  second  time,  by  a  majority  of  eleven.^ 
In  committee,  provisions  were  introduced  to  regulate 
the  relations  of  the  Eoman  Catholic  church  with 
the  state,  and  with  the  see  of  Eome.*  And  at  length, 
on  the  2nd  of  April,  the  bill  was  read  a  third  time, 
and  passed  by  a  majority  of  nineteen.^  The  fate  of 
Eejectedby    this  moasurc,  thus  far  successful,  was  soon 

the  Lords, 

April  16th     determined  in  the  House  of  Lords.     The 

and  17th,  -tn    i 

1821.  Duke  of  York  stood  forth  as  its  foremost 

opponent,  saying  that  'his  opposition  to  the  bill 
arose  from  principles  which  he  had  embraced  ever 
since  he  had  been  able  to  judge  for  himself,  and 

»  Ayes,  227  ;  Noes,  221.  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  iv.  961. 

2  Ibid.,  1066.  3  2Jic?.,  1269  ;  Ayes,  254 ;  Noes,  243. 

^  Ibid.,  1412-1489. 

»  Ayes,  216 ;  Noes,  197.  H;ins.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  iv.  1523. 


Catholic  Peers  Bill,  1822.  147 

which  he  hoped  he  should  cherish  to  the  last  day 
of  his  life.'  After  a  debate  of  two  days,  the  second 
reading  of  the  bill  was  refused  by  a  majority  of 
thirty-nine.^ 

Before  the  next  session,  Ireland  was  nearly  in  a 
state  of  revolt ;  and  the  attention  of  Par-  Disturbed 

state  of  Ire- 

liament   was    first    occupied   with   urgent  iand,i822. 
measures  of  repression, — an  Insurrection  Bill,  and 
the   suspension   of  the   Habeas   Corpus   Act.     The 
Catholic  question  was  now  presented  in  a  ^^^^^ 
modified  and  exceptional  form.     A  general  peere  bhi 
measure  of  relief  having  failed  again  and  ^^^^" 
again,  it  occurred  to  Mr.  Canning  that  there  were 
special  circumstances  affecting  the  disqualification 
of  Catholic  peers,  which  made  it  advisable  to  single 
out  their  case  for  legislation.     And  accord-  April  soth. 
ingly,  in  a  masterly  speech, — at  once  learned,  argu- 
mentative, and  eloquent, — he  moved  for  a  bill  to 
relieve  Roman  Catholic  peers  from  their  disability 
to  sit  and  vote  in  the  House  of  Lords.     Peers  had 
been  specially  exempted  from  taking  Queen  Eliza- 
beth's oath  of  supremacy,  because  the  queen  was 
'  otherwise   sufficiently   assured    of    the    faith   and 
loyalty  of  the  temporal  lords  of  her  high  court  of 
parliament.'^      The   Catholics   of    that   order   had, 
therefore,  continued  to  exercise  their  right  of  sitting 
in  the  Upper  House   unquestioned,  until   the  evil 
times  of  Titus  Gates.     The  Act  of  30  Charles  II. 
was   passed  in  the   very  paroxysm   of  excitement, 

^  Contents,  120 ;  Non-contents,  159.    Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  v. 
220,  279. 

2  oEliz.c.  1,  S.17. 

l2 


148  Religions  Libei^ty. 

which  marked  that  period.  It  had  been  chiefly 
directed  against  the  Duke  of  York,  who  had  escaped 
from  its  provisions  ;  and  was  forced  upon  the  Lords 
by  the  earnestness  and  menaces  of  the  Commons. 
Eighteen  Catholic  peers  had  been  excluded  by  it,  of 
whom  five  were  under  arrest  on  charges  of  treason  ; 
and  one,  Lord  Stafford,  was  attainted, — in  the  judg- 
ment of  history  and  posterity,  unjustly.  '  It  was 
passed  under  the  same  delusion,  was  forced  through 
the  House  of  Lords  with  the  same  impulse,  as  it 
were,  which  brought  Lord  Stafford  to  the  block.' 
It  was  only  intended  as  a  temporary  Act ;  and  with 
that  understanding  was  assented  to  by  the  king,  as 
being  '  thought  fitting  at  that  time.'  Yet  it  had 
been  suffered  to  continue  ever  since,  and  to  deprive 
the  innocent  descendants  of  those  peers  of  their 
right  of  inheritance.  The  Act  of  1791  had  already 
restored  to  Catholic  peers  their  privilege  of  advising 
the  crown,  as  hereditary  councillors,  of  which  the 
Act  of  Charles  II.  had  also  deprived  them ;  and  it 
was  now  sought  to  replace  them  in  their  seats  in 
Parliament.  In  referring  to  the  recent  coronation, 
to  which  the  Catholic  peers  had  been  invited,  for 
the  first  time  for  upwards  of  130  years,  he  pictured, 
in  the  most  glowing  eloquence,  the  contrast  between 
their  lofty  position  in  that  ceremony,  and  their 
humiliation  in  the  senate,  where  '  he  who  headed 
the  procession  of  the  peers  to-day,  could  not  sit 
among  them  as  their  equal  on  the  morrow.'  Other 
Catholics  might  never  be  returned  to  Parliament; 
but  the  peer  had  the  inherent  hereditary  right  to 
sit  with  his  peers ;  and  yet  was  personally  and  in- 


I 


I 


Catlwlic  Claims^  1823.  149 

vidiously  excluded  on  account  of  his  religion.  Mr. 
Canning  was  opposed  by  Mr.  Peel,  in  an  able  and 
temperate  argument,  and  supported  by  the  accus- 
tomed power  and  eloquence  of  Mr.  Plunket.  It 
was  obvious  that  his  success  would  carry  the  out- 
works,— ^if  not  the  very  citadel, — of  the  Catholic 
question ;  yet  he  obtained  leave  to  bring  in  his  bill 
by  a  majority  of  five.^ 

He  carried  the  second  reading  by  a  majority  of 
twelve; 2  after  which  he  was  permitted,  by  the 
liberality  of  Mr.  Peel,  to  pass  the  bill  through  its 
other  stages,  without  opposition.^  But  the  Lords 
were  still  inexorable.  Their  stout  Protestantism 
was  not  to  be  beguiled  even  by  sympathy  for  their 
own  order ;  and  they  refused  a  second  reading  to  the 
bill,  by  a  majority  of  forty-two.'^ 

After  so  many  disappointments,  the  Catholics 
were  losing  patience  and  temper.  Their  position  of 
cause  was  supported  by  the  most  eminent  ques^ion°£° 
members  of  the  government ;  yet  it  was  ^^'^'^' 
invariably  defeated  and  lost.  Neither  argument  nor 
numbers  availed  it.  Mr.  Canning  was  secretary  of 
state  for  foreign  affairs,  and  leader  of  the  House  of 
Commons;  and  Mr.  Plunket  attorney-general  for 
Ireland.  But  it  was  felt  that  so  long  as  Catholic 
emancipation  continued  to  be  an  open  question, 
there  would  be  eloquent  debates,  and  sometimes  a 
promising  division,  but  no  substantial  redress.  In 
the  House  of  Commons,  one  secretary  of  state  was 


»  Ayes,  249  ;  Noes,  244.     Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  vii.  211. 

2  Ibid.,  475.  -'  lbid.^673. 

*  Ibid.,  1216  ;  Court  and  Cabinets  of  Geo.  IV.,  i.  306. 


150  Religious  Liberty. 

opposed  to  the  other ;  and  in  the  House  of  Lords, 
the  premier  and  the  chancellor  were  the  foremost 
opponents  of  every  measure  of  relief.  The  majority 
of  the  cabinet,  and  the  great  body  of  the  ministerial 
party,  in  both  Houses,  were  adverse  to  the  cause. 
April  i7tii,  '^^^^  irritation  burst  forth  on  the  presenta- 
^^"^*  tion  of  petitions,  before  a  motion  of  Mr. 

Plunket's.  Sir  Francis  Burdett  first  gave  expression 
to  it.  He  deprecated  'the  annual  farce,'  which 
trifled  with  the  feeling's  of  the  people  of  Ireland. 
He  would  not  assist  at  its  performance.  The  Catho- 
lics would  obtain  no  redress,  until  the  government 
were  united  in  opinion  as  to  its  necessity.  An  angry 
debate  ensued,  and  a  fierce  passage  of  arms  between 
Mr.  Brougham  and  Mr.  Canning.  At  length,  Mr. 
Plunket  rose  to  make  his  motion ;  when  Sir  Francis 
Burdett,  accompanied  by  Mr.  Hobhouse,  Mr.  Crrey 
Bennet,  and  several  other  members  of  the  opposi- 
tion, left  the  House.  Under  these  discouragements 
Mr.  Plunket  proceeded  with  his  motion.  At  the 
conclusion  of  his  speech,  the  House  becoming  im- 
patient, refused  to  give  any  other  members  a  fair 
hearing;  and  after  several  divisions,  ultimately 
agreed,  by  a  majority  of  upwards  of  two  hundred,  to 
an  adjournment  of  the  House. ^  This  result,  how- 
ever unfavourable  to  the  immediate  issue  of  the 
Catholic  question,  was  yet  a  significant  warning  that 
so  important  a  measure  could  not  much  longer  be 
discussed  as  an  open  question. 

A  smaller  measure  of  relief  was  next  tried  in  vain. 

*  Ayes,  313  ;  Noes,  111.     Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Scr.,  Tiii.  1070-1123. 


J 


Marriage  Law  Amendment,  1819- 182  7.   151 

Lord  Nugent  sought  to  extend  to  English  Catholics 
the   elective  franchise,  the  commission  of  ^ordNu- 
the  peace,  and  other  offices  to  which  Catho-  Sy  28^1' 
lies   in    Ireland   were    admissible,   by   the  ^^"^* 
Act  of  1793.     Mr.  Peel  assented  to  the  justice  and 
moderation  of  this  proposal.^     The  bill  was  after- 
wards divided  into  two,^ — the  one  relating  to  the 
elective  franchise, — and  the  other  to  the  magistracy 
and   corporate  offices.^      In   this    shape   they  were 
agreed  to  by  the  Commons,  but  both  miscarried  in 
the  House  of  Lords.^     In  the  following  year,  they 
were  revived  in  the  House  of  Lords  by  Lord  Lans- 
downe,  with  no  better  success,  though  supported  by 
five  cabinet  ministers.^ 

Ineffectual    attempts   were    also    made,   at   this 
period,  to  amend  the  law  of  marriage,  by  ^^^^^^^ 
which  Catholics  and  dissenters  were  alike  mrnnsio- 
aggrieved.     In  18 19,^  and  again  in  1822,  ^^^^•' 
Mr.  William  Smith  presented  the  case  of  dissenters, 
and  particularly  of  Unitarians.     Prior  to  j^^.  w. 
Lord  Hardwicke's  Marriage  Act,  dissenters  ip^i^Jsth"' 
were  allowed  to  be  married  in  their  own  ^^^^' 
places  of  worship  :  but  under  that  Act  the  marriages 
of  all  but  Jews  and  Quakers  were  required  to  be 
solemnised  in  church,  by  ministers  of  the  establish- 
ment, and  according  to  its  ritual.     At  that  time  the 
Unitarians  were  a  small  sect ;  and  had  not  a  single 

'  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  ix.  573. 

2  Md.,  1031.  3  Bid.,  1341. 

*  Ibid.,  1476 :  Lord  Colchester's  Diary,  iii.  292,  299. 

*  May  24th,  1824 ;  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xi.  817,  842 ;  Lord  Col- 
chester's Diary,  iii.  326. 

«  June  16th,  1819  ;  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xl.  1200,  1503. 


152  Religious  Liberty. 

place  of  worship.  Having  since  prospered  and  mul- 
tiplied, tliey  prayed  that  they  might  be  married  in 
their  own  way.  They  were  contented,  however,  with 
the  omission  from  the  marriage  service  of  passages 
relating  to  the  Trinity;  and  Mr.  Smith  did  not 
venture  to  propose  a  more  rational  and  complete 
relief, — the  marriage  of  dissenters  in  their  own 
chapels.^ 

In  1823,  the  Marquess  of  Lansdowne  proposed  a 
LordLans-  ^^^^  Comprehensive  measure,  embracing 
Ju^i2th  ^^'  Roman  Catholics  as  well  as  dissenters,  and 
1823.  permitting  the  solemnisation  of  their  mar- 

riages in  their  own  places  of  worship.  The  chan- 
cellor, boasting  'that  he  took  as  just  a  view  of 
toleration  as  any  noble  Lord  in  that  House  could 
do,'  yet  protested  against '  such  mighty  changes  in 
the  law  of  marriage.'  The  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury regarded  the  measure  in  a  more  liberal  spirit ; 
and  merely  objected  to  any  change  in  the  church 
service,  which  had  been  suggested  by  Lord  Liver- 
pool. The  second  reading  of  the  bill  was  refused 
by  a  majority  of  six.^ 

In  the  following  session,  relief  to  Unitarians  was 
Unitarian  a^g^in  sought,  iu  another  form.  Lord  Lans- 
marriages.  (Jowue  introduced  a  bill  enabling  Unitarians 
to  be  married  in  their  own  places  of  worship,  after 
publications  of  bans  in  church,  and  payment  of  tlie 
LordLans-  church  fccs.  This  proposal  received  the 
downe's  support  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
May  VtSf '  and  the  Bishop  of  London  :  but  the  chan- 
•^^"*'  cellor,  more  sensitive  in  his  orthodoxy,  de- 


Ilans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  vi.  1460.  2  Ihid.,  ix.  967. 


Roma7t  Catholic  Marriages,  1824.       153 

nounced  it  as  '  tending  to  dishonour  and  degrade  the 
church  of  England.'  To  the  Unitarians  he  gave  just 
offence,  by  expressing  a  doubt  whether  they  were 
not  still  liable  to  punishment,  at  common  law,  for 
denying  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.^  The  bill 
passed  the  second  reading  by  a  small  majority :  but 
was  afterwards  lost  on  going  into  committee,  by  a 
majority  of  thirty-nine.^ 

Dr.  Phillimore,  with  no  better  success,  brought  in 
another  bill  to  permit  the  solemnisation  of  Roman 
marriages  between  Catholics,  by  their  own  marriages, 

,  ,  , .  p  April  13th, 

priests, — still  retaining  the  publication  of  1824. 
bans  or  licences,  and  the  payment  of  fees  to  the 
Protestant  clergyman.  Such  a  change  in  the  law 
was  particularly  desirable  in  the  case  of  Catholics, 
on  grounds  distinct  from  toleration.  In  the  poorer 
parishes,  large  numbers  were  married  by  their 
own  priests :  their  marriages  were  illegal,  and  their 
children,  being  illegitimate,  were  chargeable  on  the 
parishes  in  which  they  were  born.^  This  marriage 
law  was  even  more  repugnant  to  principles  of  tole- 
ration than  the  code  of  civil  disabilities.  It  treated 
every  British  subject, — whatever  his  faith, — as  a 
member  of  the  Church  of  England, — ignored  all 
religious  differences ;  and  imposed,  with  rigorous 
uniformity,  upon  all  communions  alike,, the  altar, 

»  See  also  Eex  v.  Curl:  Strange,  789;  St.  Tr.,  xvii.  154. 

2  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xi.  75,  434  ;  Twiss's  Life  of  Eldon,  ii.  512. 
Mr.  C  Wynn,  writing  to  the  Duke  of  Buckingham,  May  6th,  1824, 
said,  '  You  will,  I  am  sure,  though  you  doubted  the  propriety  of  the 
Unitarian  Marriage  Act,  regret  the  triumphant  majority  of  the  in- 
tolerant party,  who  boast  of  it  as  a  display  of  their  strength,  and  a 
proof  how  little  any  power  in  the  country  can  cope  with  them.' — 
Court  and  Cabinets  of  Geo.  IV.,  ii.  72. 

3  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xi.  408. 


154  Religiotts  Liberty. 

the  ritual,  the  ceremonies,  and  the  priesthood  of  the 
state.  And  under  what  penalties  ? — celibacy,  or 
concubinage  and  sin ! 

Three  years  later,  Mr.  W.  Smith  renewed  his 
Unitarian      measuTo,  in  a  new  form.      It   permitted 

marriages,        tt-         •  t  i*  i  it 

1827.  Unitarian  dissenters,  after  the  publication 

of  bans,  to  be  married  before  a  magistrate, — thus 
reviving  the  principle  of  a  civil  contract,  which  had 
existed  before  Lord  Hardwicke's  Act  of  1752.  Thi^ 
bill  passed  the  Commons  :  ^  but  failed  in  the  Lords, 
by  reason  of  the  approaching  prorogation.^  And 
here  the  revision  of  the  law  of  marriage  was  left  to 
await  a  more  favourable  opportunity.^ 

In  1824,  Lord  Lansdowne  vainly  endeavoured  to 
LordLans-  <5t>tain  for  English  Catholics  the  elective 
caSfifc  franchise,  the  right  to  serve  as  justices  of 
May^24th!'  ^^^  poaco,  aud  to  hold  offices  in  the  revenue.* 
^^^'  But  in  the  same  year  Parliament  agreed  to 

one  act  of  courtly  acknowledgment  to  a  distinguished 
Catholic  peer.  An  Act  was  passed,  not  without  op- 
officeof  position,  to  enable  the  Duke  of  Norfolk  to 
Ssbai,  execute  his  hereditary  office  of  Earl  Mar- 
■^^^"  shal,  without  taking  the  oath  of  supremacy, 

or  subscribing  the  declarations  against  transubstan- 
tiation  and  tlie  invocation  of  saints.^ 

Meanwhile,  the  repeated  failures  of  the  Catholic 
Agitation  causo  had  aroused  a  dangerous  spirit  of  dis- 
1823-1825.'     content  in  Ireland.     The  Catholic  leaders^ 

1  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xvii.  1 343. 
'  Ibid.,  1407,  1426  ;  Lord  Colchester's  Diary,  iii.  520. 
3  Infra,  p.  188. 

•»  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xi.  842;  Twiss's  Life  of  Eldon,  ii.  518. 
»  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xi.  1455,  1470,  1482 ;  5  Geo.  IV.  c.  109; 
Lord  Colchester's  Diary,  iii.  326;  Twiss's  Life  of  Eldon,  ii."  521. 


Catholic  Claims,  1825.  155 

despairing  of  success  over  majorities  unconvinced 
and  unyielding,  were  appealing  to  the  excited  pas- 
sions of  the  people ;  and  threatened  to  extort  from 
the  fears  of  Parliament  what  they  had  vainly  sought 
from  its  justice.  To  secure  the  peace  of  Ireland, 
the  legislature  was  called  upon,  in  1825,  to  dissolve 
the  Catholic  Association :  ^  but  it  was  too  late,  to 
check  the  progress  of  the  Catholic  cause  itself  by 
measures  of  repression;  and  ministers  disclaimed 
any  such  intention. 

While  this  measure  was  still  before  Parliament, 
the  discussion  of  the  Catholic  question  was  sir  Francis 
revived,   on   the   motion   of    Sir    Francis  motion, 

■r^        -,  -.  ,  .    .  ,        rv.  Feb  28th, 

Bm'dett,  with  unusual  spirit  and  effect.  1825. 
After  debates  of  extraordinary  interest,  in  which 
many  members  avowed  their  conversion  to  the 
Catholic  cause,^  a  bill  was  passed  by  the  Commons, 
framing  a  new  oath  in  lieu  of  the  oath  of  supre- 
macy, as  a  qualification  for  office ;  and  regulating 
the  intercourse  of  Eoman  Catholic  subjects,  in  Ire- 
land, with  the  see  of  Rome.^  On  reaching  the  House 
of  Lords,  however,  this  bill  met  the  same  fate  as  its 
predecessors  ;  the  second  reading  being  refused  by  a 
majority  of  forty-eight.^ 

With  a  view  to  make  the  Catholic  Relief  Bill 
more  acceptable,  and  at  the  same  time  to  ij.ish405 
remove  a  great  electoral  abuse,  Mr.  Little-  lowers, 
ton  had  introduced  a  measure  for  regulating  ^^-^* 

'  Su-pra,  Vol.  II.  371. 

'  February  28th,  April  19th  and  21st,  May  10th,  1825. 

3  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xii.  764,  1151  ;  Ihid.,  xiii.  21,  71,  486. 
The  second  reading  was  carried  by  a  majority  of  27,  and  the  third 
reading  by  21. 

*  May  1 7th.  Contents,  130;  Non-contents,  178.  Hans.  Deb., 
2ud  Ser.,  xiii.  662. 


156  Religious  Liberty. 

the  elective  francliise  in  Ireland.  Eespecting  vested 
interests,  he  proposed  to  raise  the  qualification  of  40s. 
freeholders  ;  and  to  restrain  the  creation  of  fictitious 
voters,  who  were  entirely  in  the  power  of  their 
landlords.  By  some  this  bill  was  regarded  as  an 
obnoxious  measure  of  disfranchisement :  but  being 
supported  by  several  of  the  steadiest  friends  of  Ire- 
land, and  of  constitutional  rights,  its  second  reading 
was  agreed  to.  When  the  Catholic  Eelief  Bill,  how- 
ever, was  lost  in  the  House  of  Lords,  this  bill  was  at 
once  abandoned.^ 

In  April  of  this  year,  Lord  Francis  Leveson  Grower 
LordP  carried  a  resolution,  far  more  startling  to 
GowSs  ^^  Protestant  party  than  any  measure  of 
Aprii29th,  enfranchisement.  He  prevailed  upon  the 
■^^^^'  Commons   to   declare   the    expediency   of 

making  provision  for  the  secular  Eoman  Catholic 
clergy,  exercising  religious  functions  in  Ireland.* 
It  was  one  of  those  capricious  and  inconsequent 
decisions,  into  which  the  Commons  were  occasionally 
drawn,  in  this  protracted  controversy,  and  was  barren 
of  results. 

In  1827,  the  hopes  of  the  Catholics,  raised  for  a 
Mr.  Can-       time  by  the  accession  of  Mr.  Canning  to 

ning's 

death.  the  head  of  affairs,   were   suddenly   cast 

down  by  his  untimely  death. 

At  the  meeting  of  Parliament  in  1828,^  the  Duke 
TiieDuke  of  Wellington's  administration  had  been 
lington's       formed.     Catholic  emancipation  was  still 

adminis- 
tration,        an  open  question  :*  but  the  cabinet,  repre- 

»  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xiii.  126,  176,  &c.,  902. 
-  Ayes,  205  ;  Noes,  162.     Md.,  308. 

^  Lord  Goderich's  ministry  had  been  formed  and  dissolved  during 
the  recess.  *  Peel's  Mem.,  i.  12,  16. 


Corporation  and  Test  Acts,  1828.       157 

sented  in  one  House  by  the  Duke,  and  in  the  other 
by  Mr.  Peel,  promised  little  for  the  cause  of  reli- 
gious liberty.  If  compliance  was  not  to  be  expected, 
still  less  was  such  a  government  likely  to  be  coerced 
by  fear.  The  great  soldier  at  its  head  retained,  for 
a  time,  the  command  of  the  army ;  and  no  minister 
knew  so  well  as  he  how  to  encounter  turbulence  or 
revolt.  In  politics  he  had  been  associated  with  the 
old  Tory  school ;  and  unbending  firmness  was  cha- 
racteristic of  his  temper  and  profession.  Yet  was 
this  government  on  the  very  eve  of  accomplishing 
more  for  religious  liberty  than  all  the  efforts  of  its 
champions  had  effected  in  half  a  century. 

The  dissenters  were  the  first  to  assault  the  Duke's 
strong  citadel.     The  question  of  the  repeal  g^^  ^^^ 
of  the  Corporation  and  Test  Acts  had  slum-  t^°  Acte, 
bered  for  nearly  forty  years,  ^  when  Lord  •^^"^' 
John  Eussell  worthily  succeeded  to  the  advocacy  of 
a  cause  which  had  been  illustrated  by  the  genius  of 
Mr.  Fox.     In  moving  for  a  committee  to  ^^^^  26th 
consider  these  Acts,  he  ably  recapitulated  ^^^^" 
their  history,  and  advanced  conclusive  arguments 
for   their    repeal.      The    annual    indemnity   Acts, 
though   offering  no  more  than  a  partial  relief  ta 
dissenters,  left  scarcely  an   argument   against   the 
repeal   of  laws   which  had  been  so  long  virtually 
suspended.     It  could  not  be  contended  that  these 
laws  were  necessary  for  the  security  of  the  church ; 
for  they  extended  neither  to  Scotland  nor  to  Ireland. 
x\bsurd  were  the  number  and  variety  of  offices  em- 
braced by  the  Test  Act ;  non-commissioned  officers 
*  Supra,  p.  105. 


158  Religious  Liberty. 

as  well  as  ofi&cers, — excisemen,  tidewaiters,  and  even 
pedlars.  The  penalties  incurred  by  these  different 
classes  of  men  were  sufficiently  alarming, — forfeiture 
of  the  office, — disqualification  for  any  other, — inca- 
pacity to  maintain  a  suit  at  law,  to  act  as  guardian 
or  executor,  or  to  inherit  a  legacy ;  and,  lastly,  a 
pecuniary  penalty  of  500^.  Even  if  such  penalties 
were  never  enforced,  the  law  which  imposed  them 
was  wholly  indefensible.  Nor  was  it  forgotten  again 
to  condemn  the  profanation  of  the  holy  sacrament, 
by  reducing  it  to  a  mere  civil  form,  imposed  upon 
persons  who  either  renounced  its  sacred  character, 
or  might  be  spiritually  unfit  to  receive  it.  Was 
it  decent,  it  was  asked, 

*  To  make  tHe  symbols  of  atoning  grace 
An  office  key,  a  pick-lock  to  a  place  ? '  * 

Nor  was  this  objection  satisfactorily  answered  by 
citing  Bishop  Slierlock's  version,  that  receiving  the 
sacrament  was  not  the  qualification  for  office,  but 
the  evidence  of  qualification.  The  existing  law  was 
defended  on  the  grounds  so  often  repeated :  that  the 
state  had  a  right  to  disqualify  persons  on  the  ground 
of  their  religious  opinions,  if  it  were  deemed  expe- 
dient :  that  there  was  an  established  church  inse- 
parable from  the  state,  and  entitled  to  its  protection ; 
and  that  the  admission  of  dissenters  would  endanger 
the  security  of  that  church. 

Mr.  Peel, — always  moderate  in  his  opposition  to 
measures  for  the  extension  of  religious  liberty, — 
acknowledged  that  the  maintenance  of  the  Corpora- 

*  Cowper's  Expostulation,  Works,  i.  p.  80  (Pickering). 


Corporation  and  Test  Acts,  1828.       159 

tion  and  Test  Acts  was  not  necessary  for  the  protec- 
tion of  the  church  ;  and  opposed  their  repeal  mainly 
on  the  ground  that  they  were  no  practical  grievance 
to  the  dissenters.  After  a  judicious  and  temperate 
discussion  on  both  sides,  the  motion  was  affirmed 
by  a  majority  of  forty-four.^  The  bill  was  after- 
wards brought  in,  and  read  a  second  time  without 
discussion.* 

The  government,  not  being  prepared  to  resign 
office  in  consequence  of  the  adverse  vote  concun-ence 
of  the  Commons,  endeavoured  to  avoid  a  bishops. 
conflict  between  the  two  Houses.  The  majority 
had  comprised  many  of  their  own  supporters,  and 
attached  friends  of  the  established  church ;  and 
Mr.  Peel  undertook  to  communicate  with  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury  and  other  prelates,  in  order  to 
persuade  them  to  act  in  concert  with  that  party, 
and  share  in  the  grace  of  a  necessary  concession.^ 
These  enlightened  churchmen  met  him  with  singular 
liberality,  and  agreed  to  the  substitution  of  a  de- 
claration for  the  sacramental  test.^  Lord  John 
Eussell  and  his  friends,  though  satisfied  that  no 
such  declaration  was  necessary,  accepted  it  as  a 
pledge  that  this  important  measure  should  be 
allowed  to  pass,  with  the  general  acquiescence  of 
all  parties  ;  ^  and  the  bill  now  proceeded  through 
the  House,  without  further  opposition.^ 

In  the  House  of  Lords,  the  Archbishop  of  York, 
expressing  the  opinion  of  the  primate  as  well  as  his 

»  Ayes,  237  ;  Noes,  193.    Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xviii.  676. 

2  Ibid.,  816,  1137.  "  Peel's  Mem.,  i.  69,  79. 

<  Jhid.,  70-98. 

^  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xriii.  1180.         «  Md.,  1330-. 


1 6o  Relig  ious  L  iberty. 

own,  'felt  bound,  on  every  principle,  to  give  Lis 
The  biu  in  ^^^^  ^'^^  ^^  repeal  of  an  Act  whicll  had,  lie 
ApriiiTth,  feared,  led,  in  too  many  instances,  to  the 
^^^^-  profanation  of  the  most  sacred  ordinance  of 

our  religion.'  '  Eeligious  tests  imposed  for  political 
purposes,  must  in  themselves  be  always  liable,  more 
or  less,  to  endanger  religious  sincerity.'  His  grace 
accepted  the  proposed  declaration  as  a  sufficient 
security  for  the  church.  The  bill  was  also  supported, 
in  the  same  spirit,  by  the  Bishops  of  Lincoln,  Dur- 
ham, and  Chester. 

But  there  were  lay  peers  more  alive  to  the  interests 
of  the  church  than  the  bench  of  bishops.  Lord 
Winchilsea  foresaw  dangers,  which  he  endeavoured 
to  avert  by  further  securities  ;  and  Lord  Eldon  de- 
nounced the  entire  principle  of  the  bill.  He  had 
little  expected  'that  such  a  bill  as  that  proposed 
would  ever  have  been  received  into  their  Lordships' 
House ; '  and  rated  those  who  had  abandoned  their 
opposition  to  its  progTess  in  the  Commons.  This 
stout  champion  of  the  church,  however,  found  no 
supporters  to  the  emphatic  '  Not  content,'  with  which 
he  encountered  the  bill ;  and  its  second  reading  was 
affirmed  without  a  division.' 

In  committee,  the  declaration  was  amended  by 
April  21st  ^^  insertion  of  the  words  '  on  the  true  faith 
and  24th.       ^£  ^   Christian,'  —  an  amendment   which 

*  Hans,  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xviii.  1450.  Lord  Eldon,  in  his  private 
correspondence,  called  it '  a  most  shameful  bill,' — '  as  bad,  as  mis- 
chievous, and  as  revolutionary  as  the  most  captious  dissenter  could 
■wish  it  to  be.'  And  again  :  *  The  administration  have,  to  their  shamo 
be  it  said,  got  the  archbishops  and  most  of  the  bishops  to  support 
this  revolutionary  bill.' — Twiss's  Life  of  Lard  Eldon,  iii.  37-45  ;  Peel  s 
Mem.,  i.  99. 


Catholic  Claims,  1828.  161 

pointedly  excluded  the  Jews,  and  gave  rise  to  further 
legislation,  at  a  later  period.^  Some  other  amend- 
ments were  also  made.  Lord  Winchilsea  endea- 
voured to  exclude  Unitarians ;  and  Lord  Eldon  to 
substitute  an  oath  for  a  declaration,  and  to  provide 
more  effectual  securities  against  the  admission  of 
Catholics :  but  these  and  other  amendments,  incon- 
sistent with  the  liberal  design  of  the  measure,  were 
rejected,  and  the  bill  passed.^  The  Lords'  April  28th. 
amendments,  though  little  approved  by  the  Com- 
mons, were  agreed  to,  in  order  to  set  this  May  2nd. 
long-vexed  question  at  rest,  by  an  act  of  enlightened 
toleration. 

This  measure  was  received  with  gratitude  by  dis- 
senters ;  and  the  grace  of  the  concession  ^j^^  ^^^ 
was  enhanced  by  the  liberality  of  the  p*^^^* 
bishops,  and  the  candour  and  moderation  of  the 
leading  statesmen,  who  had  originally  opposed  it. 
The  liberal  policy  of  Parliament  was  fully  supported 
by  public  opinion,  which  had  undergone  a  complete 
revulsion  upon  this  question.  '  Thirty  years  since,' 
said  Alderman  Wood,  '  there  were  only  two  or  three 
persons  in  the  city  of  London  favourable  to  the 
repeal :  the  other  day,  when  the  corporation  met  to 
petition  for  the  repeal,  only  two  hands  were  held  ui) 
against  the  petition.' 

The  triumph  of  dissenters  was  of  happy  augury 
to  the  Catholic  claims,  which  in  a  few  days'(,^^.j^^yQ 
were  again  presented  by  Sir  Francis  Bur-  *^^™^* 


'  On  tho  third  reading  Lord  Holland  desired  to  omit  the  words, 
but  without  success. 

"  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xyiii.  1571 ;  xix.  39,  110,  156,  18G. 
VOL.  III.  M 


1 6  2  Religious  L  iberty. 

dett.  The  preponderance  of  authority  as  well  as 
Sir  Francis    argument,  was  undeniably  in  favour  of  the 

Burdett's  -•  cj  1  •  J 

motion,        motion,    beverai  conversions  were  avowed  : 

May  8th,  ' 

1828.  and  the  younger  members  especially  showed 

an  increasing  adhesion  to  the  cause  of  religious 
liberty.'  After  a  debate  of  three  nights,  in  which 
the  principal  supporters  of  the  measure  expressed 
the  greatest  confidence  in  its  speedy  triumph,  the 
motion  was  carried  by  a  majority  of  six.^  A  reso- 
lution was  agreed  to,  that  it  was  expedient  to  con- 
sider the  laws  affecting  Roman  Catholics,  with  a 
view  to  a  final  and  conciliatory  adjustment.  Reso- 
lutions of  this  kind  had,  on  former  occasions,  pre- 
ceded the  introduction  of  bills  which  afterwards 
miscarried ;  but  Sir  Francis  Burdett  resolved  to 
avoid  the  repetition  of  proceedings  so  tedious  and 
abortive.  This  resolution  was  accordingly  commu- 
juneoth  ^icatcd  to  the  Lords,  at  a  conference.* 
1828.  rpj^g  Marquess  of  Lansdowne  invited  their 

Lordships  to  concur  in  this  resolution,  in  a  most  forci- 
ble speech ;  and  was  supported  in  the  debate  by  the 
Dukes  of  Sussex  and  Grloucester,  by  Lord  Groderich, 
the  Marquess  of  Londonderry,  Lord  Plunket,  the 
Marquess  of  Wellesley,  and  other  peers.  It  was 
opposed  by  the  Duke  of  Cumberland,  the  powerful 
Chancellor, — Lord  Lyndhurst, — the  ever-consistent 
Lord  Eldon,  the  Duke  of  Wellington,  and  an  over- 
powering number  of  speakers.  After  two  nights' 
debate,  the  Lords  refused  to  concur  in  this  resolu- 
tion, by  a  majority  of  forty-foui*.'* 

>  Peel's  Mem.,  i.  102. 

=  Ayes,  272  ;  Noes,  266.     Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xix.  375-675. 

»  Haus.  Deb.,  2iid  Ser..  xix.  680,  767.  *  lUd.,  1133,  1214. 


L 


State  of  Ireland,  1828.  163 

But  while  these  proceedings  seemed  as  illusory  as 
those  of  former  years,  popular  agitation  was  g^.^^^  ^^  ^^^ 
approaching  a  crisis  in  Ireland,^  which  con-  ^'^"'^'  ^'^^^' 
vinced  the  leading  members  of  the  administration 
that  concessions  could  no  longer  be  safely  withheld.^ 
Soon  after  this  discussion,  an  event  of  striking  sig- 
nificance marked  the  power  and  determina-  ^^^^^ 
tion  of  the  Irish  people.     Mr.  Vesey  Fitz-  £Jand 
gerald   having   vacated  his   seat    for   the  ^"^^'^^28. 
county  of  Clare,  on  accepting  office,  found  his  re- 
election contested  by  an  opponent  no  less  formidable 
than  Mr.  O'Connell.     Under  other  circumstances,  he 
could  have  confidently  relied  upon  his  personal  popu- 
larity, his  uniform  support  of  the   Catholic  claims, 
his  public  Services,  and  the  property  and  influence 
which  he  enjoyed  in  his  own  county.     But  now  all 
his  pretensions  were  unavailing.      The  people  were 
resolved  that  he  should  succumb  to  the  champion  of 
the  Catholic  cause ;  and,  after  scenes  of  excitement 
and  turbulence  which  threatened  a  disturbance  of 
the  public  peace,  he  was  signally  defeated.^ 

Perhaps  no  one  circumstance  contributed  more 
than  this  election,  to   extort   concessions  DonbtM 
from  the  government.     It  proved  the  dan-  the  cathoiic 

.         .  r»     1         T-k         soldiers  in 

gerous  power  and  organisation  of  the  Eo-  Ireland. 
man  Catholic  party.     A  general  election,  while  such 

»  8u^ra,  Vol.  II.  373.  2  Peel's  Mem.,  i.  129. 

3  Mr.  Vesey  Fitzgerald,  wi'Iting  to  Sir  R.  Peel,  July  5tli,  1828, 
said :  '  I  have  polled  all  the  gentry  and  all  the  fifty -pound  freehold- 
ers,— the  gentry  to  a  man.'  ...  *  All  the  great  interests  broke 
down,  and  the  desertion  has  been  universal.  Such  a  scene  as  we 
have  had  !  such  a  tremendous  prospect  as  it  opens  to  us ! '  .  . 
'  The  conduct  of  the  priests  has  passed  all  that  you  could  picture  to 
yourself.' — PeeC&  Mem.,  i.  113. 

M  2 


1 64  Religious  Liberty, 

excitement  prevailed,  could  not  be  contemplated 
without  alarm.  ^  If  riots  should  occur,  the  executive 
were  not  even  assured  of  the  fidelity  of  Catholic 
soldiers,  who  had  been  worked  upon  by  their  priests. 
They  could  not  be  trusted  against  rioters  of  their 
own  faith.^  The  Catholic  Association,  however,  con- 
^  ^,  ,.         tinned  to  be  the  chief  embarrassment  to 

Catnolio 

Association.  ^]^g  government.  It  had  made  Ireland 
ripe  for  rebellion.  Its  leaders  had  but  to  give  the 
word:  but,  believing  their  success  assured,  they 
were  content  with  threatening  demonstrations.^  Out 
of  an  infantry  force  of  30,000  men,  no  less  than 
25,500  were  held  in  readiness  to  maintain  the  peace 
of  Ireland.'*  Such  was  the  crisis,  that  there  seemed 
no  alternative  between  martial  law  and  the  removal 
of  the  causes  of  discontent.  Nothing  but  open  re- 
bellion would  justify  the  one ;  and  the  Commons  had, 
again  and  again,  counselled  the  other.^ 

In  the  judgment  of  Mr.  Peel,  the  settlement  of 

Necessity  the  CathoHc  question  had,  at  length,  be- 
et Catholic  ^  .        '  °      ' 

relief  como  a  political  necessity ;  and  this  con- 

ledged  by       victiou  was  shared  by  the  Duke  of  Wellino^- 

mimsters.  ^  o 

>  Peel's  Mem.,  i.  117-122,  et  seq. 

'  This  business,'  wrote  Lord  Eldon,  '  must  bring  the  Roman  Ca- 
tholic question,  which  has  been  so  often  discussed,  to  a  crisis  and  a 
conclusion.  The  nature  of  that  conclusion  I  do  not  think  likely  to 
be  favourable  to  Protestantism.' — Twiss's  Life,  iii.  54. 

*■«  Lord  Anglesey's  Letters,  July  20th,  26th,  1828  ;  Peel's  Mem.,  i. 
127,  158,  164. 

='  Lord  Anglesey's  Letter,  July  2nd,  1828;  Peel's  Mem.,  i.  147; 
Ibid.,  207,  243-262 ;  su;pTa,  Vol.  IL  374. 

•»  Peel's  Mem.,  i.  293. 

*  In  each  of  'the five  parliaments  elected  since  1807,  with  one  ex- 
ception, the  House  of  Commons  had  come  to  a  decision  in  favour  of 
a  consideration  of  the  Catholic  question ; '  and  Mr.  Peel  had  long 
been  impressed  with  the  great  preponderance  of  talent  and  influence 
on  that  ^At.— Peers  Mem.,  i.  146  ;  Ibid.,  61,  288,  289. 


Necessity  of  Catholic  Relief.  165 

ton,  the  Marquess  of  Anglesey,  and  Lord  Lynd- 
hurst.^  But  how  were  ministers  to  undertake  it? 
The  statesmen  who  had  favoured  Catholic  claims 
had  withdrawn  from  the  ministry ;  and  Lord  An- 
glesey had  been  removed  from  the  government  of 
Ireland.*  It  was  reserved  for  the  Protestant  party 
in  the  cabinet  to  devise  a  measure  which  they  had 
spent  their  lives  in  opposing.  They  would  neces- 
sarily forfeit  the  confidence,  and  provoke  the  hostility, 
of  their  own  political  adherents ;  and  could  lay  no 
claim  to  the  gratitude  or  good  will  of  the  Catholics. 

But  another  dijB&culty,  even  more  formidable,  pre- 
sented itself, — a  difficulty  which,  on  former  Repngnahce 
occasions,  had  alone  sufficed  to  paralyse  the  °^  the  king; 
efforts  of  ministers.  The  king  evinced  no  less  re- 
pugnance to  the  measure  than  his  '  revered  and  ex- 
cellent father'  had  displayed,  nearly  thirty  years 
before  ;  ^  and  had  declared  his  determination  not  to 
assent  to  Catholic  emancipation.* 

The  Duke  of  "Wellington,  emboldened  by  the  suc- 
cess of  Mr.  Peel's  former  communications  and  of  the 
with  the  bishops,  on  the  Sacramental  Test,  ^^'^''P'- 
endeavoured  to  persuade  them  to  support  concessions 
to  the  Catholics.     Their  concurrence  would  secure 

1  Peel's  Mem.,  i.  180,  181,  188,  284. 

"  The  circumstances  of  his  removal  were  fully  discussed  in  the 
House  of  Lords,  May  4th,  1829. — Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xx.  990. 

3  Peel's  Mem.,  i.  274,  276.  The  king  assured  Lord  Eldon  that 
Mr.  Canning  had  engaged  that  he  would  never  allow  his  majesty  '  to 
be  troubled  about  theEoraan  Catholic  question.' — Vecls  Mem.,  i.  27o. 
But  Sir  E.  Peel  expresses  his  conviction  that  no  such  pledge  had 
been  given  by  Mr.  Canning  {Ibid.) ;  and  even  Lord  Eldon  was 
satisfied  that  the  king's  statement  was  unfounded.' — Twiss's  Life  of 
Eldon,  iii.  82. 

*  Lord  Colchester's  Diary,  iii.  380,  473. 


1 66  Religious  Liberty, 

the  co-operation  of  the  church  and  the  House  of 
Lords,  and  influence  the  reluctant  judgment  of  the 
king.  But  he  found  them  resolutely  opposed  to  his 
views  ;  and  the  government  were  now  alarmed,  lest 
their  opinions  should  confirm  the  objections  of  his 
majesty. 

It  was  under  these  unpromising  circumstances 
Embarrass-    that,  in  Januarv  1829,  the  time  had  ar- 

mentof  .  J  ^ 

ministers,  rivcd  at  which  some  definite  course  must 
be  submitted  to  the  king,  in  anticipation  of  the  ap- 
proaching session.  It  is  not  surprising  that  Mr. 
Peel  should  have  thought  such  difficulties  almost 
insuperable.  '  There  was  the  declared  opinion  of  the 
king, — the  declared  opinion  of  the  House  of  Lords, 
— the  declared  opinion  of  the  church, — unfavourable 
to  the  measures  we  were  about  to  propose  ; '  and,  as 
he  afterwards  added,  '  a  majority,  probably,  of  the 
people  of  Great  Britain  was  hostile  to  concession.'  ^ 

Mr.  Peel,  considering  the  peculiarity  of  his  own 
Proffered  positiou,  had  Contemplated  the  necessity  of 
resig^nation  retirement :  ^  but  viewing,  with  deep  con- 
"^^®^'  cern,  the  accumulating  embarrassments  of 

the  government,  he  afterwards  placed  his  services  at 
the  command  of  the  Duke  of  Wellington.^ 

At  length,  an  elaborate  memorandum  by  Mr.  Peel 
TheMng  having  been  submitted  to  the  king.  His 
toth?*^  Majesty  gave  audience  to  those  members 
measure.  ^£  -j^^g  cabinet  who  had  always  opposed  the 
Catholic  claims ;  and  then  consented  that  the  cabinet 

»  Peel's  Mem.,  i.  278,  308. 

=  Letter  of  Duke  of  Wellington,  Aug.  11th,  1828.  Peel's  Mem., 
i.  184. 

"  Letter,  Jan.  12tli,  1829.     Peel's  Mem.,  i.  283,  294,  295. 


Catholic  Emancipation,  1829.  167 

should  submit  their  views  on  the  state  of  Ireland, 
without  pledging  himself  to  concur  in  them,  even  if 
adopted  unanimously.^  A  draft  of  the  king's  speech 
was  accordingly  prepared,  referring  to  the  state  of 
Ireland,  the  necessity  of  restraining  the  Catholic 
Association,  and  of  reviewing  the  Catholic  disabili- 
ties. To  this  draft  the  king  gave  a  '  reluctant  con- 
sent ; '  ^  and  it  was,  accordingly,  delivered  at  the 
commencement  of  the  session. 

The  government  projected  three  measures,  founded 
upon  this  speech, — the  suppression  of  the  Govem- 
Catholic  Association,  a  Eelief  Bill,  and  a  measures. 
revision  of  the  elective  franchise  in  Ireland. 

The  first  measure  submitted  to  Parliament  was  a 
bill  for  the  suppression  of  dangerous  asso-  j^o^ia- 
ciations  or  assemblies  in  Ireland.     It  met  luppreg. 
with  general  support.     The  opponents  of  Feb.'ioth, 
emancipation  complained  that  the  suppres-  ^^^^' 
sion  of  the  Association  had  been  too  long  delayed. 
The  friends  of  the  Catholic  claims,  who  would  have 
condemned  it  separately,  as  a  restraint  upon  public 
liberty,  consented  to  it,  as  a  necessary  part  of  the 
measures  for  the  relief  of  the  Catholics,  and  the 
pacification    of    Ireland.^     Hence   the   bill   passed 
rapidly  through  both   Houses.*     But  before  it  be- 
came law,  the  Catholic  Association  was  dissolved. 
A  measure  of  relief  having  been  promised,  its  mis- 
sion was  accomplished.^ 

When  this  bill  had  passed  the  Commons,  Mr.  Peel 

•  Peel's  Mem.,  i.  297.  «  Ibid,,  310. 

3  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xx.  177. 

<  Ihid.,  280,  519,  &c. 

'  On  Feb.  21th,  Lord  Anglesey  said  it  was 'defunct.' 


1 68  Religious  Liberty, 

accepted  tlie  Cliiltem  Hundreds,  in  order  to  give 
Mr  Peel  ^^^  constituents  at  Oxford  an  opportunity 
Sionat  ^^  expressing  their  opinion  of  his  new 
Oxford.  policy.  The  Protestant  feeling  of  the  uni- 
versity was  unequivocally  pronounced.  He  was  de- 
feated by  Sir  Eobert  Inglis,  and  obliged  to  take 
refuge  at  Westbury. 

The  civil  disabilities  of  the  Catholics  were  about 
rurther  ^^  ^^  Considered,  on  the  5th  of  March,  when 
^*  the^^  an  unexpected  obstacle  arose.  On  the  3rd, 
^^^-  the  king  commanded  the  attendance  of  the 

Duke  of  Wellington,  the  Lord  Chancellor,  and  Mr. 
Peel  on  the  following  day.  He  then  desired  a  more 
detailed  explanation  of  the  proposed  measure.  On 
finding  that  it  was  proposed  to  alter  the  oath  of 
supremacy,  his  majesty  refused  his  consent ;  and  his 
three  ministers  at  once  tendered  their  resignation, 
which  was  accepted.  Late  the  same  evening,  how- 
ever, he  desired  them  to  withdraw  their  resignation, 
and  gave  his  consent,  in  writing,  to  their  proceed- 
ing with  the  proposed  measm-e.^ 

This  last  obstacle  being  removed,  Mr.  Peel  opened 
Catholic  ^^^  measure  of  Catholic  emancipation  to 
SS^ti;  ^^^  House  of  Commons.  In  a  speech  of 
^^'^^"  four  hours,  he  explained  the  various  cir- 

cumstances, already  described,  which,  in  the  opinion 
of  the  government,  had  made  the  emancipation  of 
the  Catholics  a  necessity.  The  measure  itself  was 
complete  :  it  admitted  Eoman  Catholics, — on  taking 

'  Peel's  Mem.,  i.  343-349.  The  king  gave  Lord  Eldon  a  different 
version  of  this  interview,  evidently  to  exo.use  himself  from  consenting 
to  a  measure  of  which  his  old  councillor  disapproved  so  strongly. — 
Twisis  Life  of  Eldon,  iii.  83. 


Catholic  Eiiiancipation^  1829.  169 

d  new  oatli,  instead  of  the  oath  of  supremacy, — to 
both  Houses  of  Parliament,  to  all  corporate  ofi&ces, 
to  all  judicial  offices,  except  in  the  ecclesiastical 
coui'ts ;  and  to  all  civil  and  political  offices,  except 
those  of  regent,  lord  chancellor  in  England  and 
Ireland,  and  lord-lieutenant  of  Ireland.  Eestraints, 
however,  were  imposed  upon  the  interference  of 
Eoman  Catholics  in  the  dispensation  of  church  pa- 
tronage. The  government  renounced  the  idea  of 
introducing  any  securities,  as  they  were  termed,  in 
regard  to  the  Eoman  Catholic  church,  and  its  rela- 
tions to  the  state.  When  proposed  at  an  earlier 
period,  in  deference  to  the  fears  of  the  opponents  of 
emancipation,^  they  had  offended  Eoman  Catholics, 
without  allaying  the  apprehensions  of  the  Protestant 
party.  But  it  was  proposed  to  prevent  the  insignia 
of  corporations  from  being  taken  to  any  place  of 
religious  worship  except  the  established  church, — to 
restrain  Eoman  Catholic  bishops  from  assuming  the 
titles  of  existing  sees, — to  prevent  the  admission  of 
Jesuits  to  this  country,  to  ensure  the  registration  of 
those  already  there,  and  to  discourage  the  exten- 
sion of  monastic  orders.  After  two  nights'  debate, 
Mr.  Peel's  motion  for  going  into  committee  of 
/.he  whole  House  was  agreed  to  by  a  majority  of 
one  hundred  and  eighty-eight.^  Such  was  the 
change  which  the  sudden  conversion  of  the  govern- 
ment, and  the  pressure  of  circumstances,  had  effected 
in  the  opinions  of  Parliament.  Meanwhile,  the 
church  and  the  Protestant   party   throughout   the 

'  In  1813.     Surpra,  p.  141. 

2  Ayes,  348 ;  Noes,  100.    Hans.  Deb.,  2ndSer.,  727-892.    . 


<  70  Religious  Libe7'iy, 

country,  were  in  the  greatest  alarm  and  excitement. 
Tliey  naturally  resented  the  sudden  desertion  of 
their  cause,  by  ministers  in  whom  they  had  confided.* 
The  press  overflowed  with  their  indignant  remon- 
strances ;  and  public  meetings,  addresses,  and  peti- 
tions gave  tokens  of  their  activity.  Their  petitions 
far  outnumbered  those  of  the  advocates  of  the  mea- 
sure ;  2  and  the  daily  discussions  upon  their  pre- 
sentation, served  to  increase  the  public  excitement. 
The  liigher  intelligence  of  the  country  approved  the 
wise  and  equitable  policy  of  the  government :  but 
there  can  be  little  question,  that  the  sentiments  of 
a  majority  of  the  people  of  Grreat  Britain  were  op- 
posed to  emancipation.  Churchmen  dreaded  it,  as 
dangerous  to  their  church ;  and  dissenters  inherited 
from  their  Puritan  forefathers  a  pious  horror  of 
Papists.  But  in  Parliament,  the  union  of  the  mi- 
nisterial party  with'  the  accustomed  supporters  of 
the  Catholic  cause,  easily  overcame  all  opposition ; 
and  the  bill  was  passed  through  its  further  stages, 
in  the  Commons,  by  large  majorities.^ 

On  the  second  reading  of  the  bill,  in  the  House 
Thebiuin  ^^  Lords,  the  Duke  of  Wellington  justified 
ApiuS  ^^-  measure,  irrespective  of  other  con- 
1829.  siderations,  by  the  necessity  of  averting  a 

civil  war,  saying :  '  If  I  could  avoid,  by  any  sacrifice 
whatever,  even  one  month  of  civil  war  in  the  country 
to  which  I  am  attached,  I  would  sacrifice  my  life  in 
order  to  do  it.'     He  added,  that  when  the  Irish  re- 

'  Swpra,  Vol.  II.  193.  2  See  swpra,  Vol.  II.  66. 

^  On  the  second  reading — Ayes,  353;  Noes,  173.  Hans.  Deb., 
2nd  Ser.,  xx.  1115-1290.  On  the  third  reading— Ayes,  320 ;  Noes, 
142.     Ibid.,  1633. 


Catholic  Emancipation,  1829.  171 

bellion  of  1798  had  been  suppressed,  the  Legislative 
Union  had  been  proposed  in  the  next  year,  mainly 
for  the  purpose  of  introducing  this  very  measure  of 
concession ;  and  that  had  the  civil  war,  which  he 
had  lately  striven  to  avert,  broken  out,  and  been 
subdued, — still  such  a  measure  would  have  been 
insisted  upon  by  one,  if  not  by  both  Houses  of  Par- 
liament. 

The  bill  was  opposed  by  the  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury,— Dr.  Howley, — in  a  judicious  speech,  in 
which  he  pointed  out  the  practical  evils  to  which 
the  church  and  the  Protestant  religion  might  be 
exposed,  by  the  employment  of  Eoman  Catholics  as 
ministers  of  the  crown,  especially  in  the  office  of 
secretary  of  state.  It  was  also  opposed  in  debate  by 
the  Archbishops  of  York  and  Armagh,  the  Bishops 
of  Durham  and  London,  and  several  lay  peers.  But 
of  the  Protestant  party.  Lord  Eldon  was  still  tlie 
leader.  Surrounded  by  a  converted  senate, — severed 
from  all  his  old  colleagues, — deserted  by  the  peers  who 
had  hitherto  cheered  and  supported  him, — he  raised 
his  voice  against  a  measure  which  he  had  spent  a 
long  life  in  resisting.  Standing  almost  alone  among 
the  statesmen  of  his  age,  there  was  a  moral  dignity 
in  his  isolation  which  commands  our  respect.  The 
bill  was  supported  by  Mr.  Peel's  constant  friend,  the 
Bishop  of  Oxford,  the  Duke  of  Sussex,  the  Lord 
Chancellor,  Lord  Goderich,  Earl  Grrey,  Lord  Plun- 
ket,  and  other  peers.  The  second  reading  was 
affirmed  by  a  majority  of  one  hundred  and  five.* 

'  Contents,  217;  Non-contents,  112.  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  :ixi. 
42-394. 


172  Religious  Liberty. 

The  bill  passed  through  committee  without  a  single 
amendment:  and  on  the  10th  of  April  the  third 
reading  was  affirmed  by  a  majority  of  one  hundred 
and  four.^ 

Meanwhile  the  king,  whose  formal  assent  was  still  to 
TheEoyai  ^^  giveu,  was  as  strongly  opposed  to  the 
"^^"**  measure  as  ever  ;  and  even  discussed  with 

Lord  Eldon  the  possibility  of  preventing  its  further 
progress,  or  of  refusing  his  assent.  But  neither  the 
king  nor  his  old  minister  could  seriously  have  con- 
templated so  hazardous  an  exercise  of  prerogative ; 
and  the  Eoyal  assent  was  accordingly  given,  without 
further  remonstrance.^  The  time  had  passed,  when 
the  word  of  a  king  could  overrule  his  ministers 
and  Parliament. 

The  third  measure  of  the  government  still  re- 
Eiective  maius  to  be  noticed, — ^the  regulation  of  the 
in  Ireland,  elcctivc  frauchise  in  Ireland.  The  abuses 
of  the  40s.  freehold  franchise  had  already  been  ex- 
posed ;  and  were  closely  connected  with  Catholic 
emancipation.^  The  Protestant  landlords  had  en- 
couraged the  multiplication  of  small  freeholds, — 
being,  in  fact,  leases  held  of  middlemen, — in  order 
to  increase  the  number  of  dependent  voters,  and 
extend  their  own  political  influence.  Such  an  abuse 
would,  at  any  time,  have  demanded  correction  :  but 
now  these  voters  had  transferred  their  allegiance 
from  the  landlord  to  the  Catholic  priest.      'That 

»  Contents,  213  :  Non-contents,  109.  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xxL 
614-694. 

'  Twiss's  Life  of  Eldon,  iii.  84,  et  seg^.  Court  and  Cabinets  of 
Geo.  IV.,  ii.  395. 

3  Supra,  p.  155 ,  and  Reports  of  Committees  in  Lords  and  Com- 
mons, 1S25. 


Catholic  Emancipation,  1829.  173 

weapon,'  said  Mr.  Peel,  'which  the  landlord  has 
forged  with  so  much  care,  and  has  heretofore  wielded 
with  such  success,  has  broke  short  in  his  hand.'  To 
leave  such  a  franchise  without  regulation,  was  to 
place  the  county  representation  at  the  mercy  of 
priests  and  agitators.  It  was  therefore  proposed  to 
raise  the  qualification  of  a  freeholder,  from  40s.  to 
10^.,  to  require  due  proof  of  such  qualification,  and 
to  introduce  a  system  of  registration. 

So  large  a  measure  of  disfranchisement  was,  in 
itself,  open  to  many  objections.  It  swept  away  ex- 
isting rights  without  proof  of  misconduct  or  cor- 
ruption, on  the  part  of  the  voters.  So  long  as  they 
had  served  the  purposes  of  Protestant  landlords, 
they  were  encouraged  and  protected  :  but  when  they 
asserted  their  independence,  they  were  to  be  de- 
prived of  their  franchise.  Strong  opinions  were 
pronoimced  that  the  measure  should  not  be  retro- 
spective ;  and  that  the  hona  fide  40s.  freeholders,  at 
least,  should  be  protected :  ^  but  the  connection  be- 
tween this  and  the  greater  measure,  then  in  progress, 
saved  it  from  any  efiective  opposition  ;  and  it  was 
passed  rapidly  through  both  Houses.^  By  one  party, 
it  was  hailed  as  a  necessary  protection  against  the 
Catholic  priests  and  leaders :  and  by  the  other,  it 
was  reluctantly  accepted  as  the  price  of  Catholic 
emancipation. 

On  the  28th  April,  the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  Lord 

^  See  especially  tlie  speeches  of  Mr.  Huskisson,  Viscount  Palmer- 
ston,  and  the  Marquess  of  Lansdowne,  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xx. 
1373,  1468  ;xxi.  407,  574. 

2  /6ic^.,  XX.  1329. 


1 74  Religious  Liberty. 

Clifford,  and  Lord  Dornier  came  to  the  House  of 

Roman  Lords,  and  claimed  their  hereditary  seats 

peers  toke  among  the   peers,   from  which   they  had 

Apru  28th,  boen  so  long:  excluded  :  and  were  followed, 

May  1st,  ° 

1829.  a  few   days  afterwards,  by  Lord  Stafford, 

Lord  Petre,  and  Lord  Stourton.^  Eespectable  in  the 
antiquity  of  their  titles,  and  their  own  character,  they 
were  an  honourable  addition  to  the  Upper  House ; 
and  no  one  could  affirm  that  their  number  was  such 
as  to  impair  the  Protestant  character  of  that  as- 
sembly. 

Mr.  O'Connell,  as  already  stated,  had  been  re- 
Mr.  ocon-  turucd  iu  the  previous  year  for  the  county 
S'ieSi^?'  of  Clare :  but  the  privilege  of  the  new  oath 
^^^'^^'  was  restricted  to  members  returned  after 

the  passing  of  the  Act.  That  Mr.  O'Connell  would 
be  excluded  from  its  immediate  benefit,  had  been 
noticed  while  the  bill  was  in  progress ;  and  there 
€an  be  little  doubt  that  its  language  had  been  framed 
for  that  express  purpose.  So  personal  an  exclusion 
was  a  petty  accompaniment  of  this  great  remedial 
measure.  By  Mr.  O'Connell  it  was  termed  '  an  out- 
May  isth,  lawry'  against  himself.  He  contended 
^^'^^'  ably,  at  the  bar,  for  his  right  of  admission ; 

but  the  Act  was  too  distinct  to  allow  of  an  interpre- 
May  19th,  tatiou  iu  his  favour.  Not  being  permitted 
^^^*^'  to  take  the   new   oath,  and   refusing,   of 

course,  to  take  the  oath  of  supremacy, — a  new  writ 
was  issued  for  the  county  of  Clare.^  Though  re- 
turned   again    without   opposition,   ^Ir.   O'Connell 

»  Lords'  Journ.,  Ixi.  402,  408. 

»  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xxi.  1395,  1459,  1510. 


Sequel  of  Emancipation.  1 7  5 

made  his  exclusion  the  subject  of  unmeasured  in- 
vective ;  and  he  entered  the  House  of  Commons, 
embittered  against  those  by  whom  he  had  been 
enfranchised. 

At  length  this  great  measure  of  toleration  and 
justice  was  accomplished.      But  the  con-  Emancipa- 

A  -IT.       tion  too  long 

cession  came  too  late.  Accompanied  by  deferred. 
one  measure  of  repression,  and  another  of  disfran- 
chisement, it  was  wrung  by  violence  from  reluctant 
and  unfriendly  rulers.  Had  the  counsels  of  wiser 
statesmen  prevailed,  their  political  foresight  would 
have  averted  the  dangers  before  which  the  govern- 
ment, at  length,  had  quailed.  By  rendering  timely 
justice,  in  a  spirit  of  conciliation  and  equity,  they 
would  have  spared  their  country  the  bitterness,  the 
evil  passions,  and  turbulence  of  this  protracted 
struggle.  But  thirty  years  of  hope  deferred,  of 
rights  withheld,  of  discontents  and  agitation,  had 
exasperated  the  Catholic  population  of  Ireland 
against  the  English  government.  They  had  over- 
come their  rulers  ;  and  owing  them  no  gratitude, 
were  ripe  for  new  disorders.^ 

Catholic  emancipation,  like  other  great  measures, 
fell   short   of   the  anticipations,  alike   of  sequeiof 

eniancipa- 

supporters  and  opponents.  The  former  tion. 
were  disappointed  to  observe  the  continued  distrac- 
tions of  Ireland, — the  fierce  contentions  between 
Catholics  and  Orangemen, — the  coarse  and  trucu- 
lent agitation  by  which  the  ill-will  of  the  people 
was  excited  against  their  rulers — the  perverse  spirit 
in  which  every  effort  for  the  improvement  of  Ireland 
*  See  BMjjra,  Vol.  II.  374. 


176 


Religious  Liberty. 


was  received, — and  the  unmanageable  elements  of 
Irish  representation.  But  a  just  and  wise  policy  had 
been  initiated ;  and  henceforth  statesmen  strove  to 
correct  those  social  ills  which  had  arrested  the  pros- 
perity of  that  hopeful  country.  With  the  Catholic 
Eelief  Act  commenced  the  regeneration  of  Ireland. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  fears  of  the  anti-Catholic 
Number  of  P^^^J  ^^^  ^^  Safety  of  the  church  and  con- 
memb^^  stitutiou  wcrc  faintly  realised.  They 
Ho^ifsecf  dreaded  the  introduction  of  a  dangerous 
Commons,  proportion  of  Catholic  members  into  the 
House  of  Commons.  The  result,  however,  fairly 
corresponded  with  the  natural  representation  of  the 
three  countries.  No  more  than  six  Catholics  have 
sat,  in  any  parliament,  for  English  constituencies. 
Not  one  has  ever  been  returned  for  Scotland.  The 
largest  number  representing  Catholic  Ireland,  in  any 
parliament,  amounted  to  fifty-one, — or  less  than 
one-half  the  representation  of  that  country, — and 
the  average,  in  the  last  seven  parliaments,  to  no 
more    than    thirty-seven.^      In   these   parliaments 

*  Number  of  'Roman  Catholic  Members  returned  for  England,  and 
Ireland  since  the  year  1835 .-  from  the  Test  Rolls  of  the  House 
of  Commons ;  the  earlier  Test  Rolls  having  been  destroyed  by 
fire,  in  1834. 


ENGLAND 

lEELAND 

New  Parliament  1835 
Do.       1837 
Do.       1841 
Do.       1847 
Do.       1852 
Do.       1857  to  1858 
Do.       1859 

2 
2 
6 
5 
3 

\  1  Arundel 

38 

27 
33 
44 
61 
34 
34 

These  numbers,  including  members  returned  for  vacancies,  are 
sometimes  slightly  in  excess  of  the  Catholics  sitting  at  the  same 
time. 


Quakers^  Moravians,  and  Separatists.    177 

again,  the  total  number  of  Eoman  Catholic  members 
may  be  computed  at  about  one-sixteenth  of  the 
House  of  Commons.  The  Protestant  character  of 
that  assembly  was  unchanged. 

To  complete  the  civil  enfranchisement  of  dis- 
senters, a  few  supplementary  measures  Q^giers, 
were  still  required.  They  could  only  f^^  slpt'' 
claim  their  rights  on  taking  an  oath ;  and  '^^^^^^^• 
some  sects  entertained  conscientious  objections  to  an 
oath,  in  any  form.  Numerous  statutes  had  been 
passed  to  enable  Quakers  to  make  aflfirmations  in- 
stead of  oaths ;  ^  and  in  1833,  the  House  of 
Commons,  giving  a  wide  interpretation  to  these 
statutes,  permitted  Mr.  Pease, — the  first  Quaker 
who  had  been  elected  for  140  years, — to  take  his 
seat  on  making  an  affirmation.^  In  the  same  year. 
Acts  were  passed  to  enable  Quakers,  Moravians,  and 
Separatists,  in  all  cases,  to  substitute  an  affirmation 
for  an  oath.^  The  same  privilege  was  conceded,  a 
few  years  later,  to  dissenters  of  more  dubious  de- 
nomination, who,  having  been  Quakers  or  Moravians, 
had  severed  their  connection  with  those  sects,  but 
retained  their  scruples  concerning  the  taking  of  an 
oath.''  Nor  have  these  been  barren  concessions  ;  for 
several  members  of  these  sects  have  since  been 
admitted  to  Parliament ;  and  one,  at  least,  has  taken 
a  distinguished  part  in  its  debates. 

Eelief  to  dissenters  and  Roman  Catholics  had  been 

*  6  Anne,  c.  23  ;  1  Geo.  I.  st.  2,  c.  6  and  13 ;  8  Greo.  I.  c.  6 ;  22 
Geo.  II.  c.  46. 

2  See  Eeport  of  the  Select  Committee  on  his  Case,  Sess.  1833, 
No.  6. 

»  3  &  4  Will.  IV.  c.  49,  82.  *  1  &  2  Vict.  c.  77. 

VOL.  III.  N 


178  Religious  Liberty. 

claimed  on  the  broad  ground  that,  as  British  sub- 
jewish  j  ects,  they  were  entitled  to  their  civil  rights, 
disabiuties.    ^^^]^o^t  ^^   condition  of   professing    the 

religion  of  the  state.  And  in  1830,  Mr.  Robert 
Mr.  R.  Grrant  endeavoured  to  extend  this  principle 
motion,        to  the  Jcws.     The  cruel  persecutions   of 

April5th,  ^  ^  ■,.■,.,■, 

1830.  that  race  form  a  popular  episode  m  the 

early  history  of  this  countiy :  but  at  this  time  they 
merely  suffered,  in  an  aggravated  form,  the  disa- 
bilities from  which  Christians  had  recently  been 
liberated.  They  were  unable  to  take  the  oath  of 
allegiance,  as  it  was  required  to  be  sworn  upon  the 
Evangelists.  Neither  could  they  take  the  oath  of 
abjuration,  which  contained  the  words,  '  on  the  true 
faith  of  a  Christian.'  Before  the  repeal  of  the 
Corporation  and  Test  Acts,  they  had  been  admitted 
to  corporate  offices,  in  common  with  dissenters, 
under  cover  of  the  annual  indemnity  Acts  :  but  that 
measure,  in  setting  dissenters  free,  had  forged  new 
bonds  for  the  Jew.  The  new  declaration  was  re- 
quired to  be  made  '  on  the  true  faith  of  a  Christian.' 
The  oaths  of  allegiance  and  abjuration  had  not  been 
desig-ned,  directly  or  indirectly,  to  affect  the  legal 
position  of  the  Jews,  The  declaration  had,  indeed, 
been  sanctioned  with  a  forecast  of  its  consequences : 
but  was  one  of  several  amendments  which  the 
Commons  were  constrained  to  accept  from  the  Lords, 
to  secure  the  passing  of  an  important  measure.^ 
The  operation  of  the  law  was  fatal  to  nearly  all  the 
rights  of  a  citizen.  A  Jew  could  not  hold  any  office, 
civil,  military,  or  corporate.     He  could  not  follow 

*  See  »w_pra,  p.  161, 


yewtsh  Disabilities,  1830.  179 

the  profession  of  the  law,  as  barrister  or  attorney,  or 
attorney's  clerk :  he  could  not  be  a  schoolmaster, 
or  usher  at  a  school.  He  could  not  sit  as  a  member 
of  either  House  of  Parliament;  nor  even  exercise 
the  elective  franchise,  if  called  upon  to  take  the 
electors'  oath. 

Mr.  Grant  advocated  the  removal  of  these  oppres- 
sive disabilities   in  an  admirable   speech,  Aaguments 

on  either 

embracing  nearly  every  argument  which  side. 
was  afterwards  repeated,  again  and  again,  in  support 
of  the  same  cause.  He  was  brilliantly  supported,  in 
a  maiden  speech,  by  Mr.  Macaulay,  who  already 
gave  promise  of  his  future  eminence.  In  the  hands 
of  his  opponents,  the  question  of  religious  liberty 
now  assumed  a  new  aspect.  Those  who  had  re- 
sisted, to  the  last,  every  concession  to  Catholics,  had 
rarely  ventured  to  justify  their  exclusion  from  civil 
rights,  on  the  ground  of  their  religious  faith.  They 
had  professed  themselves  favourable  to  toleration; 
and  defended  a  policy  of  exclusion,  on  political 
grounds  alone.  The  Catholics  were  said  to  be  dan- 
gerous to  the  state, — their  numbers,  their  organisa- 
tion, their  allegiance  to  a  foreign  power,  the  ascen- 
dency of  their  priesthood,  their  peculiar  political 
doctrines,  their  past  history, — all  testified  to  the 
political  dangers  of  Catholic  emancipation.  But 
nothing  of  the  kind  could  be  alleged  against  the 
Jews.  They  were  few  in  number,  being  computed 
at  less  than  30,000,  in  the  United  Kingdom.  They 
were  harmless  and  inactive  in  their  relations  to  the 
state  ;  and  without  any  distinctive  political  charac- 
ter. It  was,  indeed,  difficult  to  conceive  any  poli- 
»  2 


i8o  Relioio2is  Liberty. 

tical  objections  to  tbeir  enjoyment  of  civil  privileges, 
— yet  some  were  found.  They  were  so  rich,  that, 
like  the  nabobs  of  the  last  centmy,  they  would  buy 
seats  in  Parliament, — an  argument,  as  it  was  well 
replied,  in  favour  of  a  reform  in  Parliament,  rather 
than  against  the  admission  of  Jews.  If  of  any 
value,  it  appKed  with  equal  force  to  all  rich  men, 
whether  Jews  or  Christians.  Again,  they  were  of 
no  country, — they  were  strangers  in  the  land,  and 
had  no  sympathies  with  its  people.  Eelying  upon 
the  spiritual  promises  of  restoration  to  their  own 
Holy  Land,  they  were  not  citizens,  but  sojourners, 
in  any  other.  But  if  this  were  so,  would  they  value 
the  rights  of  citizenship,  which  they  were  denied  ? 
Would  they  desire  to  serve  a  country,  in  which  they 
were  aliens?  And  was  it  the  fact  that  they  were 
indifferent  to  any  of  those  interests,  by  which  other 
men  were  moved  ?  Were  they  less  earnest  in  busi- 
ness, less  alive  to  the  wars,  policy,  and  finances  of 
the  state  ;  less  open  to  the  refining  influences  of  art, 
literature,  and  society  ?  How  did  they  differ  from 
their  Christian  fellow-citizens,  '  save  these  bonds'  ? 
Political  objections  to  the  Jews  were,  indeed,  felt  to 
be  untenable ;  and  their  claims  were  therefore  re- 
sisted on  religious  grounds.  The  exclusion  of  Chris- 
tian subjects  from  their  civil  rights,  had  formerly 
been  justified  because  they  were  not  members  of  the 
established  church.  Now  that  the  law  had  recog- 
nised a  wider  toleration,  it  was  said  that  the  state, 
its  laws  and  institutions  being  Christian,  the  Jews, 
.who  denied  Christ,  could  not  be  sufifered  to  share, 
with  Christians,  the  government  of  the  state.    Espe- 


Jewish  Disabilities y  1 8  3  3- 1 8  34.       181 

cially  was  it  urged,  that  to  admit  them  to  Parliament 
would  unchristianise  the  lesfislature. 

The  House   of  Commons,  which  twelve  months 
before  had  passed  the  Catholic  Eelief  Bill  Jewish 
by  vast  majorities,  permitted  Mr.  Grrant  to  lost  on 

-,     •  •       1   •     1  •11    1  •  second 

bring  m  his  bill  by  a  majority  of  eighteen  reading. 
only;^    and  afterwards  refused  it  a  second  reading 
by  a  majority  of  sixty-three.^     The  argu-  ^^  ^^^^^ 
menfcs  by  which  it  was  opposed  were  founded  ^^^^• 
upon  a  denial  of  the  broad  principle  of  religious 
liberty  ;  and  mainly  on  that  ground  were  the  claims 
of  the  Jews  for  many  years  resisted.     But  the  history 
of  this  long  and  tedious  controversy  must  be  briefly 
told.     To  pursue  it  'through  its  weary  annals  were  a 
profitless  toil. 

In  1833,  Mr.   Grant  renewed  his  measure;  and 
succeeded  in  passing  it  through  the  Com-  j^^^j^ 
mons  :  but  the  Lords  rejected  it  by  a  large  S!'^^'^^ 
majority.^     In  the  next  year,  the  measure  ^^^^^' 
met  a  similar  fate.'*    The  determination  of  the  Lords 
was  clearly  not  to  be  shaken ;  and,  for  some  years, 
no  further  attempts  were  made  to  press  upon  them 
the  re-consideration  of  similar  measures.     The  Jews 
were,  politically,  powerless  :  their  race  was  unpopu- 
lar, and  exposed  to  strongly-rooted  prejudice ;  and 

'  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xxiii.  1287- 

-  Ibid.,  xxiv.  785.  See  also  Macaulay's  Essays,  i.  308 ;  Gold- 
smid's  Civil  Disabilities  of  British  Jews,  1830  ;  Blunt's  Hist,  of  the 
Jews  in  England ;  First  Report  of  Criminal  Law  Commission, 
1845,  p.  13. 

^  Contents,  54 ;  Il^on-contents,  104,  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xvii. 
2C5  ;  xviii.  69  ;  xx.  249. 

*  The  second  reading  was  lost  in  the  Lords  by  a  majority  of  92. 
Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxii.  1372- ;  Ibid.,  xxiii.  1158, 1349  ;  Ibid.,  xxiv. 
382,  720. 


182  Religious  Liberty. 

tlieir  cause, — however  firmly  supported  on  the 
ground  of  religious  liberty, — had  not  been  generally 
espoused  by  the  people,  as  a  popular  right. 

But  while  vainly  seeking  admission  to  the  legis- 
jews  ad-  lature,  the  Jews  were  relieved  from  other 
tS'cS?  disabilities.  In  1839,  by  a  clause  in  Lord 
porations.  Peumau's  Act  for  amending  the  laws  of  evi- 
dence all  persons  were  entitled  to  be  sworn  in  the  form 
most  binding  on  their  conscience.^  Henceforth  the 
Jews  could  swear  upon  the  Old  Testament  the  oath 
of  allegiance,  and  every  other  oath  not  containing 
the  words  '  on  the  true  faith  of  a  Christian.'  These 
words,  however,  still  excluded  them  from  corporate 
ofl&ces,  and  from  Parliament.  In  1841,  Mr.  Divett 
succeeded  in  passing  through  the  Commons  a  bill 
for  the  admission  of  Jews  to  corporations :  but  it 
was  rejected  by  the  Lords.^  In  1845,  however,  the 
Lords,  who  had  rejected  this  bill,  accepted  another, 
to  the  same  effect,  from  the  hands  of  Lord  Lynd- 
hurst.^ 

Parliament  alone  was  now  closed  against  the 
Jews.  In  1848,  efforts  to  obtain  this  privilege  were 
renewed  without  effect.  The  Lords  were  still  inex- 
orable. Enfranchisement  by  legislative  authority 
appeared  as  remote  as  ever;  and  attempts  were  there- 
fore made  to  bring  the  claims  of  Jewish  subjects  to 
an  issue,  in  another  form. 

In  1847,  Baron  Lionel  Nathan  de  Rothschild  was 

»  1  &  2  Vict.  c.  105. 

2  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  Ivi.  504;  Ivii.  99  ;  Iviii.  1458. 

3  8  &  9  Vict.  c.  52 ;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  Ixxviii.  407,  415  ; 
First  Eeport  of  Criminal  Law  Commission,  1845  (Eeligious 
Opinions),  43. 


Jewish  Disabilities,  184 7- 1850.       183 

returned   as  one  of  the   members  for  the   city  of 
London.     The  choice  of  a  Jew  to  represent  ^^^^ 
such  a  constituency  attested  the  state  of  Rott^c^^^ 
public  opinion,  upon  the  question  in  dis-  foSe^^ 
pute  between  the  two  Houses  of  Parliament.  London, 
It  may   be  compared   to   the  election  of  ^^^* 
Mr.  O'Connell,  twenty  years  before,  by  the  county 
of  Clare.     It   gave  a  more  definite   and  practical 
character   to  the  controversy.     The  grievance  was 
no  longer  theoretical :  there  now  sat  below  the  bar 
a  member  legally  returned  by  the  wealthiest  and 
most  important  constituency  in  the  kingdom :  yet 
he  looked  on  as  a  stranger.     None  could  question 
his  return  :  no  law  affirmed  his  incapacity ;   then 
how  was  he  excluded?     By  an  oath  designed  for 
Eoman  Catholics,  whose   disabilities  had  been  re- 
moved.    He  sat  there,  for  four  sessions,  in  expecta- 
tion of  relief  from  the  legislature :  but  being  again 
disappointed,  he  resolved  to  try  his  rights  under  the 
existing  law.     Accordingly,  in  1850,  he  presented 
himself,  at  the  table,  for  the  purpose  of  cmjjngto 
taking  the  oaths.     Having  been  allowed,  Jufy^s^eSi', 
after  discussion,  to  be  sworn  upon  the  Old  and  Aug^ 
Testament, — the  form  most  binding  upon  ^*^'  ^^''^* 
his   conscience, — he    proceeded  to  take  the  oaths. 
The  oaths  of  allegiance  and  supremacy  were  taken 
in  the  accustomed  form :  but  from  the  oath  of  ab- 
juration he  omitted  the  words  '  on  the  true  faith  of 
a  Christian,'  as  not  binding  on  his  conscience.     He 
was  immediately  directed  to  withdraw ;  when,  after 
many  learned  arguments,  it  was  resolved  that  he 
was  not  entitled  to  sit  or  vote  until  he  had  taken 


1 84  Religious  Liberty, 

the  oath  of  abjuration  in  the  form  appointed  by 
law.^ 

In  1851,  a  more  resolute  efifort  was  made  to  over- ' 
Mr.  Alder-  come  the  obstacle  offered  by  the  oath  of 
Salomons,      abiuratiou.      Mr.   Alderman   Salomons,   a 

July  ISth,  "^  ' 

1851.  Jew,  having  been  returned  for  the  borough 

of  Grreenwich,  omitted  from  the  oath  the  words 
which  were  the  Jews'  stumbling  block.  Treating  these 
words  as  immaterial,  he  took  the  entire  substance 
of  the  oath,  with  the  proper  solemnities.  He  was 
directed  to  withdraw :  but  on  a  later  day,  while  his 
case  was  imder  discussion,  he  came  into  the  House, 
and  took  his  seat  within  the  bar,  whence  he  de- 
clined to  withdraw,  until  he  was  removed  by  the 
Sergeant  at  Arms.  The  House  agreed  to  a  resolu- 
tion, in  the  same  form  as  in  the  case  of  Baron  de 
Eothschild.  In  the  meantime,  however,  he  had  not 
only  sat  in  the  House,  but  had  voted  in  three 
divisions;*  and  if  the  House  had  done  him  an  in- 
justice, there  was  now  an  opportunity  for  obtaining 
a  judicial  construction  of  the  statutes,  by  the  courts 
of  law.  By  the  judgment  of  the  Court  of  Exchequer, 
affirmed  by  the  Court  of  Exchequer  Chamber,  it  was 
soon  placed  beyond  further  doubt,  that  no  authority, 
short  of  a  statute,  was  competent  to  dispense  with 
those  words  which  Mr.  Salomons  had  omitted  from 
the  oath  of  abjuration. 

There  was  now  no  hope  for  the  Jews,  but  in  over- 
Further        coming  the  steady  repugnance  of  the  Lords ; 

legislative  i      1   .  t 

efforts.         and  this  was  vainly  attempted,  year  after 

*  Commons'  Journ.,  cv.  584,  590,  612  ;  Hans,  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  cxiii. 
297,  396,  486,  769. 

2  Commons'  Journ.,  cvi.  372.  373,  381,  407;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser., 
cxviii.  979,  1320. 


Jewish  Disabilities,  1857.  185 

year.  Recent  concessions,  however,  had  greatly- 
strengthened  the  position  of  the  Jews.  When  the 
Christian  character  of  our  laws  and  constitution 
were  again  urged  as  conclusive  against  their  full 
participation  in  the  rights  of  British  subjects,^  Lord 
John  Russell  and  other  friends  of  religious  liberty- 
were  able  to  reply : — Let  us  admit  to  the  fullest 
extent  that  our  country  is  Christian, — as  it  is :  that 
our  laws  are  Christian, — as  they  are ;  that  our  go- 
vernment, as  representing  a  Christian  country,  is 
Christian, — as  it  is, — what  then  ?  Will  the  removal 
of  civil  disabilities  from  the  Jews,  unchristianise  our 
country,  our  laws,  and  our  government  ?  They  will 
all  continue  the  same,  unless  you  can  argue  that 
because  there  are  Jews  in  England,  therefore  the 
English  people  are  not  Christian  ;  and  that  because 
the  laws  permit  Jews  to  hold  land  and  houses,  to 
vote  at  elections,  and  to  enjoy  municipal  ofl&ces, 
therefore  our  laws  are  not  Christian.  We  are  deal- 
ing with  civil  rights ;  and  if  it  be  unchristian  to 
allow  a  Jew  to  sit  in  Parliament, — ^not  as  a  Jew,  but 
as  a  citizen, — it  is  equally  unchristian  to  allow  a  Jew 
to  enjoy  any  of  the  rights  of  citizenship.  Make  him 
once  more  an  alien,  or  cast  him  out  from  among 
you  altogether.2 

Baron    de  Rothschild    continued    to  be  returned 
again  and  again  for  the  city  of  London, —  Attempt  to 
a  testimony  to  the  settled  purpose  of  his  Jews  by  a 

*  See  especially  the  speeches  of  Mr.  Whiteside  and  Mr.  Walpole, 
April  loth,  1853,  on  this  view  of  the  question, — Hans.  Deb.,  3rd 
Ser.,  exxv.  1230,  1263. 

2  See  especially  Lord  J.  Eussell's  speech,  April  loth,  1853. — 
Md.,  1283. 


1 86  Religious  Liberty, 

constituents :  but  there  appeared  no  prospect  of 
declaration,  relief.  In  1857,  liowever,  auotlier  loopliole 
isot!  '  of  the  law  was  discovered,  through  which  a 
Jew  might  possibly  find  his  way  into  the  House  of 
Commons.  The  annual  bill  for  the  removal  of 
Jewish  disabilities  had  recently  been  lost,  as  usual, 
in  the  House  of  Lords,  wlien  Lord  John  Eussell 
called  attention  to  the  provisions  of  a  statute,^  by 
which  it  was  contended  that  the  Commons  were 
empowered  to  substitute  a  new  form  of  declaration, 
for  the  abjuration  oath.  If  this  were  so,  the  words 
'  on  the  true  faith  of  a  Christian,'  might  be  omitted » 
and  the  Jew  would  take  his  seat,  without  waiting 
longer  for  the  concurrence  of  the  Lords.3  But  a 
committee,  to  whom  the  matter  was  referred",  did 
not  support  this  ingenious  construction  of  the  law ;  * 
and  again  the  case  of  the  Jews  was  remitted  to 
legislation. 

In  the  following  year,  however,  this  tedious  con- 
Jewish         troversy   was   nearly   brouo-ht   to   a  close. 

Relief  Act,       rr^        ^        ^  .•.-,.  i 

1S58.  The  Lords,  yielding  to  the  persuasion  of 

the  Conservative  premier.  Lord  Derby,  agTeed  to  a 
concession.  The  bill,  as  passed  by  the  Commons,  at 
once  removed  the  only  legal  obstacle  to  the  admis- 
sion of  the  Jews  to  Parliament.  To  this  general 
enfranchisement  the  Lords  declined  to  assent :  but 
they  allowed  either  House,  by  resolution,  to  omit 
the  excluding  words  from  the  oath  of  abjuration. 
The  Commons  would  thus  be  able  to  admit  a  Jewish 

'  In  1849,  and  again  in  1857,  he  placed  his  seat  at  the  disposal 
of  the  electors,  by  accepting  the  Chiltern  Hundreds,  but  was  imme- 
diately re-elected.  Commons'  Joum.,  cxii.  343  ;  Ann.  Reg.,  Chron., 
141. 

=  5  &  6  Will.  IV.  e.  62.  ^  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  clvii.  933. 

*  Report  of  Committee,  Sess.  2,  1857,  No.  253. 


Jewish  Relief  Act,  1858.  187 

member, — the  Lords  to  exclude  a  Jewish  peer.  The 
immediate  object  of  the  law  was  secured :  but  what 
was  the  principle  of  this  compromise  ?  Other  British 
subjects  held  their  rights  under  the  law :  the  Jews 
were  to  hold  them  at  the  pleasure  of  either  House 
of  Parliament.  The  Commons  might  admit  them 
to-day,  and  capriciously  exclude  them  to-morrow. 
If  the  crown  should  be  advised  to  create  a  Jewish 
peer,  assuredly  the  Lords  would  deny  him  a  place 
amongst  them.  On  these  grounds,  the  Lords' 
amendments  found  little  favour  with  the  Commons : 
but  they  were  accepted,  under  protest,  and  the  bill 
was  passed.^  The  evils  of  the  compromise  were 
soon  apparent.  The  House  of  Commons  was,  indeed, 
open  to  the  Jew :  but  he  came  as  a  suppliant. 
"VNTienever  a  resolution  was  proposed,  under  the 
recent  Act,^  invidious  discussions  were  renewed, — the 
old  sores  were  probed.  In  claiming  his  new  fran- 
chise, the  Jew  might  still  be  reviled  and  insulted. 
Two  years  later,  this  scandal  was  corrected ;  and  the 
Jew,  though  still  holding  his  title  by  a  standing 
order  of  the  Commons,  and  not  under  the  law,  ac- 
quired a  permanent  settlement.^  Few  of  the  ancient 
race  have  yet  profited  by  their  enfranchisement :  ^ 
but  their  wealth,  station,  abilities,  and  character 
have  amply  attested  their  claims  to  a  place  in  the 
legislature. 

»  21  &  22  Vict.  c.  48,  49;  Comm.  Joum.,  cxiii.  338;  Hans.  Deb., 
3rd  Ser.,  cli.  1905. 

-  A  resolution  "was  held  not  to  be  in  force  after  a  prorogation  ; 
Keport  of  Committee,  Sess.  1,  1859,  No.  205. 

»  23  &  24  Vict.  c.  63.  By  the  29  &  30  Vict.  c.  19,  a  new  form 
of  oath  was  established,  from  which  the  words  '  on  the  true  faith  of 
a  Christian '  were  omitted ;  and  thus,  at  length,  all  distinctions  be- 
tween the  J  ews  and  other  members  were  obhterated. 


1 88  Religious  Liberty, 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

FURTHER   MEASITRES    OF   EELIEF   TO   DISSENTERS ! — CHUECH  RATES  t 

LATER  HISTORY  OF  THE  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND  : — PROGRESS  OF 
DISSENT  : — THE  PAPAL  AGGRESSION,  1850  : — THE  CHURCH  OF  SCOT- 
LAND : — THE  PATRONAGE  QUESTION  '. — CONFLICT  OF  CIVIL  AND 
ECCLESIASTICAL  JURISDICTIONS  : — THE  SECESSION,  1843  : — THE  FREE 
CHURCH   OF   SCOTLAND: — THE   CHURCH  OF   IRELAND. 

The  code  of  civil  disabilities  had  been  at  length 
other  ques-  Condemned  I  but  during  the  protracted 
ingthe         controversv  which  led  to  this  result,  many 

church  and 

religion.  othor  qucstious  affecting  religious  liberty 
demanded  a  solution.  Further  restraints  upon  reli- 
gious worship  were  renounced  ;  and  the  relations  of 
the  church  to  those  beyond  her  communion  reviewed 
in  many  forms.  Meanwhile,  the  later  history  of  the 
established  churches,  in  each  of  the  three  kingdoms, 
was  marked  by  memorable  events,  affecting  their 
influence  and  stability. 

When  Catholics  and  dissenters  had  shaken  off 
Dissenters'  ^^^^^^  ^ivil  disabilities,  they  were  still  ex- 
riaSj  S?d"  posed  to  grievances  affecting  the  exercise 
bunais.  q£  their  religion  and  their  domestic  rela- 
tions, far  more  galling,  and  savouring  more  of  in- 
tolerance. Their  marriages  were  announced  by  the 
publication  of  bans  in  the  parish  church ;  and  solem- 
nised at  its  altar,  according  to  a  ritual  which  they 
repudiated.  The  births  of  their  children  were  with- 
out legal  evidence,  unless  they  were  baptised  by  a 


Dissenters  Marriages^  1834.  189 

clergyman  of  the  church,  with  a  service  obnoxious 
to  their  consciences  ;  and  even  their  dead  could  not 
obtain  a  Christian  burial,  except  by  the  ofl&ces  of 
the  church.  Even  apart  from  religious  scruples 
upon  these  matters,  the  enforced  attendance  of  dis- 
senters at  the  services  of  the  church  was  a  badge  of 
inferiority  and  dependence,  in  the  eye  of  the  law. 
Nor  was  it  without  evils  and  embarrassments  to  the 
church  herself.  To  perform  her  sacred  offices  for 
those  who  denied  their  sanctity,  was  no  labour  of 
love  to  the  clergy.  The  marriage  ceremony  had 
sometimes  provoked  remonstrances ;  and  the  sacred 
character  of  all  these  services  was  impaired  when 
addressed  to  unwilling  ears,  and  used  as  a  legal 
form,  rather  than  a  religious  ceremony.  It  is  strange 
that  such  grievances  had  not  been  redressed  even 
before  dissenters  had  been  invested  with  civil  privi- 
leges. The  law  had  not  originally  designed  to  inflict 
them :  but  simply  assuming  all  the  subjects  of  the 
realm  to  be  members  of  the  Church  of  England,  had 
made  no  provision  for  exceptional  cases  of  conscience. 
Yet  when  the  oppression  of  the  marriage  law  had 
been  formerly  exposed,^  intolerant  Parliaments  had 
obstinately  refused  relief.  It  was  reserved  for  the 
reformed  Parliament  to  extend  to  all  religious  sects 
entire  freedom  of  conscience,  coupled  with  great 
improvements  in  the  general  law  of  registration. 
As  the  church  alone  performed  the  religious  services 
incident  to  all  baptisms,  marriages,  and  deaths ;  so 
was  she  entrusted  with  the  sole  management  and 
custody  of  the  registers.     The  relief  of  dissenters, 

*  Supra,  p.  151. 


IQO  Religiotcs  Liberty. 

therefore,  involved  a  considerable  interference  with 
the  privileges  of  the  church,  which  demanded  a 
judicious  treatment. 

The  marriage  law  was  first  approached.  In  1834, 
Dissenters'  Lord  Johu  Eusscll, — ^to  whom  dissenters 
Biu,    °        already  owed  so  much, — introduced  a  bill 

Feb.  25tli,  '' 

1834.  to  permit  dissenting  ministers  to  celebrate 

marriages  in  places  of  worship  licensed  for  that 
purpose.  It  was  proposed,  however,  to  retain  the 
accustomed  publication  of  bans  in  church,  or  a 
licence.  Such  marriages  were  to  be  registered  in 
the  chapels  where  they  were  celebrated.  There 
were  two  weak  points  in  this  measure, — of  which 
Lord  John  himself  was  fully  sensible, — the  publica- 
tion of  bans,  and  the  registry.  These  difficulties 
could  only  be  completely  overcome  by  regarding 
marriage,  for  all  legal  purposes,  as  a  civil  contract, 
accompanied  by  a  civil  registry :  but  he  abstained 
from  making  such  a  proposal,  in  deference  to  the 
feelings  of  the  church  and  other  religious  bodies.^ 
The  bill,  in  such  a  form  as  this,  could  not  be  ex- 
pected to  satisfy  dissenters ;  and  it  was  laid  aside.^ 
It  was  clear  that  a  measure  of  more  extensive  scope 
would  be  required,  to  settle  a  question  of  so  much 
delicacy. 

In  the  next  session.  Sir  Eobert  Peel,  having  pro- 
sir  Robert  fi^cd  by  this  uusuccessful  experiment, 
D^senters'  offcrcd  auothcr  measure,  based  on  different 
SchiTth,  principles.  Reverting  to  the  principle  of 
■^^'^*^"  the  law,  prior  to  Lord  Hardwicke's  Act  of 

1754,  which  viewed  marriage,  for  certain  purposes 

»  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxi.  776.          ^  Com.  Journ.,  Ixxxix.  226. 


Dissenters  Mar7nages,  1835,  191 

at  least,  as  a  civil  contract,  he  proposed  that  dis- 
senters objecting  to  the  services  of  the  church  should 
enter  into  a  civil  contract  of  marriage,  before  a 
magistrate, — to  be  followed  by  such  religious  cere- 
monies elsewhere,  as  the  parties  might  approve. 
For  the  publication  of  bans  he  proposed  to  substitute 
a  notice  to  the  magistrate,  by  whom  also  a  certificate 
was  to  be  transmitted  to  the  clergyman  of  the 
parish  for  registration.  The  liberal  spirit  of  this 
measure  secured  it  a  favourable  reception:  but  its 
provisions  were  open  to  insuperable  objections.  To 
treat  the  marriage  of  members  of  the  church  as  a 
religious  ceremony,  and  the  marriage  of  dissenters 
as  a  mere  civil  contract,  apart  from  any  religious 
sanction,  raised  an  offensive  distinction  between  the 
two  classes  of  marriages.  And  again,  the  ecclesias- 
tical registry  of  a  civil  contract,  entered  into  by 
dissenters,  was  a  very  obvious  anomaly.  Lord  John 
Eussell  expressed  his  own  conviction  that  no  measure 
would  be  satisfactory  until  a  general  system  of  civil 
registration  could  be  established, — a  subject  to  which 
he  had  abeady  directed  his  attention.^  The  pro- 
gress of  this  bill  was  interrupted  by  the  resignation 
of  Sir  E.  Peel.  The  new  ministry,  having  ^^^  22nd, 
consented  to  its  second  reading,  allowed  it  ^^^^■ 
to  drop :  but  measures  were  promised  in  the  next 
session  for  the  civil  registry  of  births,  June  29th. 
marriages,  and  deaths,  and  for  the  marriage  of 
dissenters.'^ 

Early  in  the  next  session.  Lord  John  Russell  in- 

»  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxvi.  1073.    '  Ihid.^  3rd  Ser.,  xxix.  11. 


192  Religious  Liberty, 

troduced  two  bills  to  carry  out  these  objects.  The  first 
Register  ^^^  ^"^^  ^^  registration  of  births,  marriages, 
marSSs,  ^^^  dcaths.  Its  immediate  purpose  was  to 
Fel'mhT'  facilitate  the  granting  of  relief  to  dissenters : 
^^^^'  but  it  also  contemplated  other  objects  of 

state  policy,  of  far  wider  operation.  An  accurate 
record  of  such  events  is  important  as  evidence  in  all 
legal  proceedings ;  and  its  statistical  and  scientific 
value  cannot  be  too  highly  estimated.  The  existing 
registry  being  ecclesiastical  took  no  note  of  births, 
but  embraced  the  baptisms,  marriages,  and  burials, 
which  had  engaged  the  services  of  the  church.  It 
was  now  proposed  to  establish  a  civil  registration  of 
births,  marriages,  and  deaths,  for  which  the  oJBficers 
connected  with  the  new  poor  law  administration 
afforded  great  facilities.  The  record  of  births  and 
deaths  was  to  be  wholly  civil ;  the  record  of  marri- 
ages was  to  be  made  by  the  minister  performing  the 
ceremony,  and  transmitted  to  the  registrar.  The 
measure  further  provided  for  a  general  register  office 
in  London,  and  a  division  of  the  country  into  regis- 
tration districts.^ 

The  Marriage  Bill  was  no  less  comprehensive.  The 
Dissenters*  marriagcs  of  members  of  the  Church  of 
Bm^Tb!  England  were  not  affected,  except  by  the 
12th,  1836.  necessary  addition  of  a  civil  registry.  The 
publication  of  bans,  or  licence,  was  continued,  unless 
the  parties  themselves  preferred  giving  notice  to  a 
registrar.  The  marriages  of  dissenters  were  allowed 
to  be  solemnised  in  their  own  chapels,  registered  for 
that  purpose,  after  due  notice  to  the  registrar  of  the 

»  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxxi.  367. 


Dissenters  Burials,  193 

district ;  while  those  few  dissenters  who  desired  no 
religious  ceremony,  were  enabled  to  enter  into  a 
civil  contract  before  the  superintendent  registrar.^ 
Measures  so  comprehensive  and  well  considered 
could  not  fail  to  obtain  the  approval  of  Parliament. 
Every  religious  sect  was  satisfied:  every  object  of 
state  policy  attained.  The  church,  indeed,  was 
called  upon  to  make  sacrifices :  but  she  made  them 
with  noble  liberality.  Her  clergy  bore  their  pecu- 
niary losses  without  a  murmur,  for  the  sake  of  peace 
and  concord.  Fees  were  cheerfully  renounced  with 
the  services  to  which  they  were  incident.  The  con- 
cessions, so  gracefully  made,  were  such  as  dissenters 
had  a  just  right  to  claim,  and  the  true  interests  of 
the  church  were  concerned  no  longer  in  with- 
holding. 

In  baptism  and  marriage,  the  offices  of  .the  church 
were  now  confined  to  her  own  members,  or  dissenters' 
to  such  as  sought  them  willingly.  But  in  ^'^^s- 
death,  they  were  still  needed  by  those  beyond  her 
communion.  The  church  claimed  no  jurisdiction 
over  the  graves  of  her  nonconformist  brethren :  but 
every  parish  burial-place  was  hers.  The  churchyard, 
in  which  many  generations  of  churchmen  slept,  was 
no  less  sacred  than  the  village  church  itself;  yet 
here  only  could  the  dissenter  find  his  last  resting- 
place.  Having  renounced  the  communion  of  the 
church  while  living,  he  was  restored  to  it  in  death. 
The  last  offices  of  Christian  burial  were  performed 

»  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxxi.  367  ;  6  &  7  Will.  IV.  c.  85,  86, 
amended  by  1  Viet.  c.  22.  In  1852  the  registration  of  chapels  for  all 
other  purposes  as  well  as  marriages  was  transferred  to  the  registrar- 
general.— 15  &  16  Vict.  c.  36. 

VOL.  III.  O 


194  Religious  Liberty. 

over  him,  in  consecrated  ground,  by  tlie  clergyman 
of  the  parish,  and  according  to  the  ritual  of  the 
church.  Nowhere  was  the  painfulness  of  schism 
more  deeply  felt,  on  either  side.  The  clergyman 
reluctantly  performed  the  solemn  service  of  his 
church,  in  presence  of  mourners  who  seemed  to 
mock  it,  even  in  their  sorrow.  Nay,  some  of  the 
clergy, — having  scruples,  not  warranted  by  the  laws 
of  their  church, — even  refused  Christian  burial  to 
those  who  had  not  received  baptism  at  the  hands  of 
a  priest,  in  holy  orders.^  On  his  side  the  dissenter 
recoiled  from  the  consecrated  ground,  and  the  oj0&ces 
of  the  church.  Bitterness  and  discord  followed  him 
to  the  grave,  and  frowned  over  his  ashes. 

In  country  parishes  this  painful  contact  of  the 
church  with  nonconformity  was  unavoidable :  but  in 
populous  towns,  dissenters  were  earnest  in  providing 
themselves  with  separate  burial  grounds,  and  uncon- 
secrated  parts  of  cemeteries.^  And  latterly  they 
have  further  sought,  for  their  own  ministers,  the 
privilege  of  performing  the  burial  service  in  the 
parish  churchyard,  with  the  permission  of  the  in- 
cumbent.^ In  Ireland  ministers  of  all  denomina- 
tions have  long  had  access  to  the  parish  bm'ial 
grounds.*     Such  a  concession  was  necessary  to  meet 

•  Kemp  V.  Wickes,  1809,  Phil,  iii.  264  ;  Escott  f/Masten,  1842  ; 
Notes  of  Eccl.  Cases,  i.  552  ;  Titchmarsh  v.  Chapman,  1844  :  Ibid., 
iii.  370. 

2  Local  Cemetery  Acts,  and  16  &  17  Vict.  c.  134,  s.  7.  The  Bishop 
of  Carlisle  having  refused  to  consecrate  a  cemetery  unless  the  un- 
consecrated  part  was  separated  by  a  wall,  the  legislature  interfered 
to  prevent  so  iuTidious  a  separation. — 20  &  21  Vict.  c.  81,  s.  11. 

3  Feb.  19th  and  April  24th,  1861  (Sir  Morton  Peto) ;  Hans. 
Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  cLsi.  650;  clxii.  1051 ;  May  2nd,  1862  ;  lUd.,  clxvi. 
1189.  «  5  Geo.  IV.  c.  25. 


Universities.  195 

the  peculiar  relations  of  the  population  of  that 
country  to  the  church :  but  in  England,  it  has  not 
hitherto  found  favour  with  the  legislature. 

In  1834,  another  conflict  arose  between  the  church 
and  dissenters,  when  the  latter  claimed  to  Admission 

.1-1  -^        of  dissenters 

participate,  with  churchmen,  m  the  benefits  to  the  uni- 

■*•  versities, 

of  those  great  schools  of  learning  and  is34. 
orthodoxy, — the  English  universities.  The  position 
of  dissenters  was  not  the  same  in  both  universities. 
At  Oxford,  subscription  to  the  thirty-nine  articles 
had  been  required  on  matriculation,  since  1581  ;  and 
dissenting  students  had  thus  been  wholly  excluded 
from  that  university.  It  was  a  school  set  apart  for 
members  of  the  church.  Cambridge  had  been  less 
exclusive.  It  had  admitted  nonconformists  to  its 
studies,  and  originally  even  to  its  degrees.  But 
since  1616,  it  had  required  subscription  on  proceed- 
ing to  degrees.  Dissenters,  while  participating  in 
all  its  studies,  were  debarred  from  its  honours  and 
endowments, —  its  scholarships,  degrees,  and  fellow- 
ships,— and  from  any  share  in  the  government  of  the 
university.  From  this  exclusion  resulted  a  quasi 
civil  disability,  for  which  the  universities  were  not 
responsible.  The  inns  of  court  admitted  graduates 
to  the  bar  in  three  years,  instead  of  five ;  graduates 
articled  to  attorneys  were  admitted  to  practice  after 
three  years  ;  the  Colleges  of  Physicians  and  Surgeons 
admitted  none  but  graduates  as  fellows.  The  exclu- 
sion of  dissenters  from  universities  was  confined  to 
England.  Since  1793,  the  University  of  Dublin  had 
been  thrown  open  to  Catholics  and  dissenters,^  who 

»  33  Geo.  III.  c.  21  (Irish). 
o  2 


1 9  6  Religiotcs  L  iberty. 

were  admitted  to  degrees  in  arts  and  medicine  ;  and 
in  the  universities  of  Scotland  there  was  no  test  to 
exclude  dissenters. 

Several  petitions  concerning  these  claims  elicited 
Petitions  to  f^ll  discussion  in  both  Houses.  Of  these 
both  Houses,  petitions,  the  most  remarkable  was  signed 
by  sixty-three  members  of  the  senate  of  the  Uni- 
versity of  Cambridge,  distinguished  in  science  and 
literature,  and  of  eminent  position  in  the  university. 
It  prayed  that  dissenters  should  be  admitted  to  take 
the  degTees  of  bachelors,  masters,  or  doctors  in  arts, 
March  21st  ''■^^5  ^^^  physic.  Earl  Grrey,  in  presenting 
1834.  £j.  ^Q  ^j^g  House  of  Lords,  opened  the  case 

of  the  dissenters  in  a  wise  and  moderate  speech, 
which  was  followed  by  a  fair  discussion  of  the  con- 
flicting rights  of  the  church  and  dissenters.^  In  the 
March  24th.  Commous,  Mr.  Spring  Eice  ably  repre- 
sented the  case  of  the  dissenters,  which  was  also 
supported  by  ]\Ir.  Secretary  Stanley  and  Lord 
Palmerston,  on  behalf  of  the  Grovernment;  and 
opposed  by  Mr.  Goulbum,  Sir  E.  Inglis,  and  Sir 
Eobert  Peel.^  Petitions  against  the  claims  of  dis- 
senters were  also  discussed,  particularly  a  counter- 
petition,  signed  by  259  resident  members  of  the 
University  of  Cambridge.^ 

Apart  from  the  discussions  to  which  these  peti- 
universities   tious  gave  I'ise,  the  case  of  the  dissenters 

BiU,  April  J      1    .         T  ^    n 

17th,  1834.  was  presented  m  the  more  definite  shape  of 
a  bill,  introduced  by  Mr.  G-eorge  Wood.'*     Against 

»  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxii.  497.  =  Ihid.,  670,  G23,  674. 

=»  Unci.,  xxii.  1009. 

*  iiii?.,  xxii.  900.    Ayes,  185;  Noes,  44.    Colonel  Williams  having 


Universities,  197 

tlie  admission  of  dissenters,  it  was  argued  that  the 
religious  education  of  the  universities  must  either 
be  interfered  with  or  else  imposed  upon  dissenters. 
It  would  introduce  religious  discord  and  controver- 
sies, violate  the  statutes  of  the  universities,  and 
clash  with  the  internal  discipline  of  the  different 
colleges.  The  universities  were  instituted  for  the 
religious  teaching  of  the  Church  of  England ;  and 
were  corporations  enjoying  charters  and  Acts  of 
ParKament,  under  which  they  held  their  authority 
and  privileges,  for  that  purpose.  If  the  dissenters 
desired  a  better  education  for  themselves,  they  were 
rich  and  zealous,  and  could  found  colleges  of  their 
own,  to  vie  with  Oxford  and  Cambridge  in  learning, 
piety,  and  distinction. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  was  contended  that  the 
administration  of  dissenters  would  introduce  a  better 
feeling  between  that  body  and  the  chui'ch.  Their 
exclusion  was  irritating  and  invidious.  The  reli- 
gious education  of  the  universities  was  one  of  learn- 
ing rather  than  orthodoxy ;  and  it  was  more  pro- 
bable that  dissenters  would  become  attracted  to  the 
church,  than  that  the  influence  of  the  chm-ch  and  its 
teaching  would  be  impaired  by  their  presence  in  the 
universities.  The  experience  of  Cambridge  proved 
that  discipline  was  not  interfered  with  by  their  ad- 
mission to  its  studies ;  and  the  denial  of  degrees  to 
students  who  had  distinguished  themselves  was  a 
galling  disqualification,  upon  which  churchmen 
ought  not  to  insist.  The  example  of  Dublin  Univer- 

moved  for  an  address,  the  bill  was  ordered  as  an  amendment  to 
that  question. 


198  Religious  L  iberty. 

sity  was  also  relied  on,  whose  Protestant  character 
had  not  been  aflfected,  nor  its  discipline  interfered 
with,  by  the  admission  of  Eoman  Catholics.  This 
June  20th.  bill  being  warmly  espoused  by  the  entire 
Liberal  party,  was  passed  by  the  Commons,  with  large 
juiy28tii.  majorities.^  In  the  Lords,  however,  it  was 
received  with  marked  disfavour.  It  was  strenuously 
Aug.  1st.  opposed  by  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
the  Duke  of  Gloucester,  the  Duke  of  Welling- 
ton, and  the  Bishop  of  Exeter ;  and  even  the  new 
Premier,  Lord  Melbourne,  who  supported  the  second 
reading,  avowed  that  he  did  not  entirely  approve  of 
the  measure.  In  his  opinion  its  objects  might  be 
better  effected  by  a  good  understanding  and  a  com- 
promise between  both  parties,  than  by  the  force  of 
an  Act  of  Parliament.  The  bill  was  refused  a  second 
reading  by  a  majority  of  one  hundred  and  two.^ 

Not  long  afterwards,  however,  the  just  claims  of 
_    ,  dissenters  to  academical  distinction  were 

London 

StebSS,  ^®^J  without  trenching  upon  the  church, 
1836.  Qj,  ^jjg  ancient  seats  of  learning, — by  the 

foundation  of  the  University  of  London, — open  to 
students  of  every  creed.^  Some  years  later,  the 
Oxford  and  ^ducation,  discipHue,  and  endowments  of 
unTveSties  ^^®  oldcr  univcrsities  called  for  the  inter- 
'^^*^*  position  of  Parliament ;  and  in  considering 

their  future  regulation,  the  claims  of  dissenters  were 
not  overlooked.    Provision  was  made  for  the  opening 

^  On  second  reading — Ayes,  321 ;  Noes,  147.  On  third  reading — 
Ayes,  164  ;  Noes,  75.     Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,xxiii.  632,  635. 

'2  Contents,  85 ;  Non-Contents,  187.  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxr. 
815. 

'  Debates,  March  26th,  1835  ;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxvii.  279 ; 
London  University  Charters,  Nov.  1836.  and  Dec.  1837. 


Dissenters^  Chapels  Bill,  1844.         199 

of  halls,  for  their  collegiate  residence  and  discipline ; 
and  the  degrees  of  the  universities  were  no  longer 
withheld  from  their  honourable  ambition.* 

The  contentions  hitherto  related  have  been 
between  the  church  and  dissenters.     But  Dissenters' 

Chapels  BUI, 

rival  sects  have  had  their  contests  :  and  m  1844. 
1844  the  legislature  interposed  to  protect  the  endow- 
ments of  dissenting  communions  from  being  despoiled 
by  one  another.  Decisions  of  the  Court  of  Chancery 
and  the  House  of  Lords,  in  the  case  of  Lady 
Hewley's  charity,  had  disturbed  the  secm-ity  of  all 
property  held  in  trust  by  nonconformists,  for  re- 
ligious purposes.  The  faith  of  the  founder, — not 
expressly  defined  by  any  will  or  deed,  but  otherwise 
collected  from  evidence, — was  held  to  be  binding 
upon  succeeding  generations  of  dissenters.  A 
change  or  development  of  creed  forfeited  the  endow- 
ment ;  and  what  one  sect  forfeited,  another  might 
claim.  A  wide  field  was  here  opened  for  litigation. 
Lady  Hewley's  trustees  had  been  dispossessed  of  their 
property,  after  a  ruinous  contest  of  fourteen  years., 
In  the  obscure  annals  of  dissent,  it  was  difficult  to 
trace  out  the  doctrinal  variations  of  a  religious 
foundation ;  and  few  trustees  felt  themselves  secure 
against  the  claims  of  rivals,  encouraged  at  once  by 
the  love  of  gain  and  by  religious  hostility.  An  un- 
friendly legislature  might  have  looked  with  com- 
placency upon  endowments  wasted,  and  rivalries  em- 
bittered.     Dissent    might    have    been    put     into 

'  Oxford  University  Act,  17  &  18  Vict.  c.  81,  s.  43,  44,  &6. ; 
Cambridge  University  Act,  19  &  20  Vict.  c.  88,  s.  45,  &c.  These 
degrees,  however,  did  not  entitle  them  to  offices  hitherto  held  by 
churchmen. 


200  Religious  Liberty. 

chancery,  without  a  helping  hand.  But  Sir  Eobert 
Peel's  enlightened  chancellor.  Lord  Lyndhurst,  came 
forward  to  stay  further  strife.  His  measure  pro- 
vided that  where  the  founder  had  not  expressly 
defined  the  doctrines  or  form  of  worship  to  be 
observed,  the  usage  of  twenty-five  years  should  give 
trustees  a  title  to  their  endowment ;  ^  and  this  solu- 
tion of  a  painful  difficulty  was  accepted  by  Parlia- 
ment. It  was  not  passed  without  strong  opposition 
on  religious  grounds,  and  fierce  jealousy  of  Unita- 
rians, whose  endowments  had  been  most  endangered : 
but  it  was,  in  truth,  a  judicious  legal  reform  rather 
than  a  measure  afiecting  religious  liberty.^ 

In  the  same  spirit.  Parliament  has  empowered  the 
Endowed       trustcos    of    eudowcd    schools    to    admit 

SchoolsAct,       ...  _  /.T/v»  T. 

I860.  children   of  different  religious  denomina- 

tions, imless  the  deed  of  foundation  expressly  limited 
the  benefits  of  the  endowment  to  the  chm-ch,  or 
some  other  religious  communion.^ 

Long  after  Parliament  had  frankly  recognised 
Repeal  of  Complete  freedom  of  religious  worship, 
reS^S  ^^  many  intolerant  enactments  still  bore  wit- 
worship.  jjggg  ^Q  ^^  rigour  of  our  laws.  Liberty 
had  been  conceded  so  grudgingly, — and  clogged  with 
so  many  conditions, — ^that  the  penal  code  had  not 
yet  disappeared  from  the  statute-book.  In  1845, 
the  Criminal  Law  Commission  enumerated  the 
restraints  and  penalties  which  had  hitherto  escaped 
the  vigilance  of  the  legislature.'*     And  Parliament 

»   Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  Ixxiv.  579,  821. 
'  Ibid.,  Ixxv.  321,  383 ;  Ixxvi.  116 ;  7  &  8  Vict.  c.  45. 
»  23  Vict.  c.  11. 

*  First  Eeport  of  Crim.  Law  Commission  (Keligious  Opinions), 
1845. 


Church  Rates.  201 

has  since  blotted  out  many  repulsive  laws  affecting 
the  religious  worship  and  education  of  Eoman 
Catholics,  and  others  not  in  communion  with  the 
church.' 

The  church  honourably  acquiesced  in  those  just 
and  necessary  measures  which  secured  to  church 
dissenters  liberty  in  their  religious  worship  ^^^• 
and  ministrations,  and  exemption  from  civil  dis- 
abilities. But  a  more  serious  contention  had  arisen 
affecting  her  own  legal  rights, — her  position  as  the 
national  establishment, — and  her  ancient  endow- 
ments. Dissenters  refused  payment  of  church 
rates.  Many  suffered  imprisonment,  or  distraint  of 
their  goods,  rather  than  satisfy  the  lawful  demands 
of  the  church.''  Others,  more  practical  and  saga- 
cious, attended  vestries,  and  resisted  the  imposition 
of  the  annual  rate  upon  the  parishioners.  And 
during  the  progress  of  these  local  contentions, 
Parliament  was  appealed  to  by  dissenters  for  legisla- 
tive relief. 

The  principles  involved  in  the  question  of  chm*ch 
rate,  while   differing   in  several  material  principles 
points  from  those  concerned  in  other  con-  i^^oi^^d. 
troversies  between  the  church  and  dissenters,  may 
yet  be  referred  to  one  common  origin, — the  legal 
recognition  of  a  national  church,  with  all  the  rights 


>  See  2  &  3  WUl.  4,  s.  115  (Catholic  Chapels  and  Schools);  7  & 
8  Vict.  c.  102  ;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  Ixxiv.  691 ;  Ixxvi.  1165 ;  9  & 
10  Vict.  c.  59  ;  Ibid.,  Ixxxiii.  495.  Among  the  laws  repealed  by  this 
Act  -was  the  celebrated  statute  or  ordinance  of  Henry  III.,  '  pro  ex- 
pulsione  Judaeorum.'     18  &  19  Vict.  c.  86  (Registration  of  Chapels). 

2  See  debates,  July  30th,  1839;  July  24th,  1840  (Thorogood's 
case) ;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xlix.  998  ;  Iv.  939.  Appendix  to  Re- 
port of  Committee  on  Church  Rates,  1851,  p.  %^(^-Qt^b. 


202  Religious  Liberty. 

incident  to  sucli  an  establishment,  in  presence  of  a 
powerful  body  of  nonconformists.  By  the  common 
law,  the  parishioners  were  bound  to  maintain  the 
fabric  of  the  parish  church,  and  provide  for  the 
decent  celebration  of  its  services.  The  edifice  con- 
secrated to  public  worship  was  sustained  by  an 
annual  rate,  voted  by  the  parishioners  themselves 
assembled  in  vestry,  and  levied  upon  all  occupiers  of 
land  and  houses  within  the  parish,  according  to  their 
ability.*  For  centuries,  the  parishioners  who  paid 
this  rate  were  members  of  the  church.  They  gazed 
with  reverence  on  the  antique  tower ;  hastened  to 
prayers  at  the  summons  of  the  sabbath  bells ;  sat 
beneath  the  roof  which  their  contributions  had  re- 
paired ;  and  partook  of  the  sacramental  bread  and 
wine  which  their  liberality  had  provided.  The  rate 
was  administered  by  lay  churchwardens  of  their  own 
choice ;  and  all  cheerfully  paid  what  was  dispensed 
for  the  common  use  and  benefit  of  all.  But  times 
had  changed.  Dissent  had  grown,  and  spread  and 
ramified  throughout  the  land.  In  some  parishes, 
dissenters  even  outnumbered  the  members  of  the 
church.  Supporting  their  own  ministers,  building 
and  repairing  their  own  chapels,  and  shunning  the 
services  and  clergy  of  the  parish  church,  they  re- 
sented the  payment  of  church  rate  as  at  once  an 
onerous  and  unjust  tax,  and  an  ofifence  to  their  con- 
sciences. They  insisted  that  the  burden  should  be 
borne  exclusively  by  members  of  the  church.     Such, 

>  Lyndwood,  53  ;  Wilkins'  Concil.,  i.  253  ;  Coke's  2nd  Inst.,  489, 
653;  13  Edw.  I.  (statute,  Circums'pecte  agatis);  Sir  J.  Campbell's 
letter  to  Lord  Stanley,  1837  ;  Eeportof  Commission  on  Eccl.  Courts, 
1832. 


Church  Rates.  203 

they  contended,  had  been  the  original  design  of 
church  rate ;  and  this  principle  should  again  be 
recognised,  under  altered  conditions,  by  the  state. 
The  church  stood  firmly  upon  her  legal  rights.  The 
law  had  never  acknowledged  such  a  distinction 
of  persons  as  that  contended  for  by  dissenters  ;  nay, 
the  tax  was  chargeable,  not  so  much  upon  persons, 
as  upon  property ;  and  having  existed  for  centuries, 
its  amount  was,  in  truth,  a  deduction  from  rent.  If 
dissenting  tenants  were  relieved  from  its  payment, 
their  landlords  would  immediately  claim  its  equiva- 
lent in  rental.  But,  above  all,  it  was  maintained 
that  the  fabric  of  the  church  was  national  property, 
— an  edifice  set  apart  by  law  for  public  worship, 
according  to  the  religion  of  the  state, — open  to  all, 
— inviting  all  to  its  services — and  as  much  the 
common  property  of  all,  as  a  public  museum  or 
picture-gallery,  which  many  might  not  care  to  enter, 
or  were  unable  to  appreciate. 

Such   being   the   irreconcilable   principles   upon 
which  each  party  took  its  stand,  conten-  Lord 
tions  of  increasinar  bitterness  became  rife  scheme 

of  com- 

m  many  parishes, — painful  to  churchmen,  mutation, 
irritating  to  dissenters,  and  a  reproach  to  1834. 
religion.  In  1834,  Earl  Grey's  ministry,  among  its 
endeavours  to  reconcile,  as  far  as  possible,  all  difier- 
ences  betweei^  the  church  and  dissenters,  attempted 
a  solution  of  this  perplexing  question.  Their 
scheme,  as  explained  by  Lord  Althorp,  was  to  sub- 
stitute for  the  existing  church  rate  an  annual  grant 
of  250,000^.  from  the  consolidated  fund,  for  the  re- 
pair of  churches.     This  sum,  equal  to  about  half  the 


204  Religious  Liberty. 

estimated  rate,  was  to  be  distributed  rateably  to  the 
several  parishes.  Church  rate,  in  short,  was  to 
become  national  instead  of  parochial.  This  ex- 
pedient found  no  favour  with  dissenters,  who  would 
still  be  liable  to  pay  for  the  support  of  the  church, 
in  another  form.  Nor  was  it  acceptable  to  church- 
men, who  deemed  a  j&xed  parliamentary  subsidy,  of 
reduced  amount,  a  poor  equivalent  for  their  existing 
rights.  The  bill  was,  therefore,  abandoned,  having 
merely  served  to  exemplify  the  intractable  difficul- 
ties of  any  legislative  remedy.^ 

In  1837,  Lord  Melbourne's  government  approached 
Mr.  sprinc'  ^^^  cmbarrassiug  question  with  no  better 
SSme  for  succcss.  Their  scheme  provided  a  fund  for 
SS  ^^  repair  of  churches  out  of  surplus 
March  3rd,  reveuucs,  to  arisc  from  an  improved  ad- 
^^^^*  ministration  of  church  lands.^     This  mea- 

sure might  well  satisfy  dissenters :  but  was  wholly 
repudiated  by  the  church.^  It  abandoned  church 
rates,  to  which  she  was  entitled  ;  and  appropriated 
her  own  revenues  to  purposes  otherwise  provided  for 
by  law.  She  enjoyed  both  sources  of  income,  and 
it  was  simply  proposed  to  deprive  her  of  one.  If 
her  revenues  could  be  improved,  she  was  herself  en- 
titled to  the  benefit  of  that  improvement,  for  other 
spiritual  objects.  If  church  rates  were  to  be  sur- 
rendered, she  claimed  from  the  state  another  fund, 
as  a  reasonable  equivalent. 

But  the  legal  rights  of  the  church,  and  the  means 

'  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xx.  1012  ;  Comm.  Journ.,  Ixxxix.  203, 
207. 

2  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxxvi.  1207;  xxxviii.  1073. 
«  Ann.  Reg.,  1837,  p.  85. 


Church  Rates.  205 

of  enforcing  them,  were  about  to  be  severely  con- 
tested by  a  long  course  of  litigation.  In  The  first 
1837,  a  majority  of  the  vestry  of  Braintree  case, 
having  postponed  a  church  rate  for  twelve  months, 
the  churchwardens  took  upon  themselves,  of  their 
own  authority,  and  in  defiance  of  the  vestry,  to  levy 
a  rate.  In  this  strange  proceeding  they  were  sup- 
ported, for  a  time,  by  the  Consistory  Court,  ^  on  the 
authority  of  an  obscure  precedent.^  But  the  Court 
of  Queen's  Bench  restrained  them,  by  prohibition, 
from  collecting  a  rate,  which  Lord  Denman  em- 
phatically declared  to  be  '  altogether  invalid,  and  a 
church  rate  in  nothing  but  the  name.'  ^  In  this 
opinion  the  Court  of  Exchequer  Chamber  concurred.'* 
Chief  Justice  Tindal,  however,  in  giving  the  judg- 
ment of  this  court,  suggested  a  doubt  whether  the 
churchwardens,  and  a  minority  of  the  vestry  to- 
gether, might  not  concur  in  granting  a  rate,  at  the 
meeting  of  the  parishioners  assembled  for  that  pur- 
pose. This  suggestion  was  founded  on  the  principle 
that  the  votes  of  the  majority,  who  refused  to  per- 
form their  duty,  were  lost  or  thrown  away ;  while 
the  minority,  in  the  performance  of  the  prescribed 
duty  of  the  meeting,  represented  the  whole  number. 
This  subtle  and  technical  device  was  promptly 
tried  at  Braintree.  A  rate  being  again  ^^  ^^^^^^ 
refused  by  the  majority,  a  monition  was  Ja^^^^*^°° 
obtained  from  the  Consistory  Court,  com-  ^^-i^^- 

'  A'eley  v.  Burder,  Nov.  15th,  1857 ;  App.  to  Eeport  of  Cbxrcli 
Bates  Co.,  1851,  p.  601. 

-  Gaiidern  v.  Selby  in  the  Court  of  Arches,  1799. 

3  Lord  Denman's  Judgment,  May  1st,  1840;  Burder  v.  Veley; 
Adolph.  and  Ellis,  xii.  244. 

•i  Feb.  8th,  1841 ;  Ihid.,  300. 


2o6  Religious  Liberty. 

manding  the  churchwardens  and  parishioners  to 
make  a  rate  according  to  lawJ  In  obedience  to 
this  monition,  another  meeting  was  assembled  ;  and 
a  rate  being  again  refused  by  the  majority,  it  was 
immediately  voted  in  their  presence,  by  the  church- 
wardens and  the  minority.^  A  rate  so  imposed  was 
of  course  resisted.  The  Consistory  Court  pronounced 
it  illegal :  the  Court  of  Arches  adjudged  it  valid. 
The  Court  of  Queen's  Bench,  which  had  scouted  the 
authority  of  the  churchwardens,  respected  the  right 
of  the  minority, — scarcely  less  equivocal, — to  bind 
the  whole  parish ;  and  refused  to  stay  the  collection 
of  the  rate  by  prohibition.  The  Court  of  Exchequer 
Chamber  affirmed  this  decision.  But  the  House  of 
Lords, — superior  to  the  subtilties  by  which  the 
broad  principles  of  the  law  had  been  set  aside, — 
asserted  the  unquestionable  rights  of  a  majority. 
The  Braintree  rate  which  the  vestry  had  refused,  and 
a  small  minority  had  assumed  to  levy,  was  pro- 
nounced invalid.^ 

This  construction  of  the  law  gravely  affected  the 
itsefEect  relations  of  the  church  to  dissenters, 
righte'of  From  this  time,  church  rates  could  not 
the  church,  practically  be  raised  in  any  parish,  in 
which  a  majority  of  the  vestry  refused  to  impose 
them.  The  church,  having  an  abstract  legal  title  to 
receive  them,  was  powerless  to  enforce  it.  The  legal 
obligation  to  repair  the  parish  church  continued  : 
but  church  rates  assumed  the  form  of  a  voluntary 
contribution,  rather  than  a  compulsory  tax.     It  was 

'  June  22nd,  1841.  «  Julj  loth,  1841. 

8  Jurist^  xvii.  939.     Clark's  House  of  Lords'  Cases,  iv.  679-814. 


Church  Rates.  207 

vain  to  threaten  parishioners  with  the  censures  of 
ecclesiastical  courts,  and  a  whole  parish  with  ex- 
communication.^ Such  processes  were  out  of  date. 
Even  if  vestries  had  lost  their  rights,  by  any  forced 
construction  of  the  law,  no  rate  could  have  been 
collected  against  the  general  sense  of  the  parishion- 
ers. The  example  of  Braintree  was  quickly  followed. 
Wherever  the  dissenting  body  was  powerful,  can- 
vassing and  agitation  were  actively  conducted,  until, 
in  1859,  church  rates  had  been  refused  in  no  less 
than  1,525  parishes  or  districts.^  This  was  a  serious 
inroad  upon  the  rights  of  the  church. 

While  dissenters  were  thus  active  and  successful 
in  their  local  resistance  to  church  rates,  Buisforthe 

.  .  abolition  of 

they  were  no  less  strenuous  m  their  appeals  church  rates, 
to  Parliament  for  legislative  relief.  Grovernment 
having  vainly  sought  the  means  of  adjusting  the 
question,  in  any  form  consistent  with  the  interests  of 
the  church,  the  dissenters  organised  an  extensive 
agitation  for  the  total  repeal  of  church  rates.  Pro- 
posals for  exempting  dissenters  from  payment  were 
repudiated  by  both  parties.^  Such  a  compromise 
was  regarded  by  churchmen  as  an  encouragement  to 
dissent,  and  by  nonconformists  as  derogatory  to  their 
rights   and   pretensions,  as    independent   religious 

•  Church  Eates  Committee,  1851:  Dr.  Lushington's  Ev.,  Q. 
2358-2365  ;  Courtald's  Ev.,  489-491 ;  Pritchard's  Ev.,  Q.  660,  661  ; 
Terrell's  Ev.,  Q.  1975-1982 ;  Dr.  Lushington's  Ev.  before  Lords' 
Committee,  1859. 

2  Pari.  Eeturn,  Sess.  2,  1359,  No.  7. 

3  On  Feb.  11th,  1840,  a  motion  by  Mr.  T.  Duncombe  to  this  effect 
was  negatived  by  a  large  majority.  Ayes,  62  ;  Noes,  117. — Gomm. 
Joum.,  xcv.  74.  Again,  on  March  13th,  1849,  an  amendment  to  the 
same  purpose  found  only  twenty  supporters.  In  1852  a  bill  to  re- 
lieve dissenters  from  the  rate,  brought  in  by  Mr.  Packe,  was  with- 
drawn. 


2o8  Religious  Liberty, 

bodies.  The  first  bill  for  the  abolition  of  church 
rates  was  introduced  in  1841  by  Sir  John  Easthope, 
but  was  disposed  of  without  a  division.*  For  several 
years  similar  proposals  were  submitted  to  the 
Commons  without  success.^  In  1855,  and  again  in 
1856,  bills  for  this  purpose  were  read  a  second  time 
by  the  Commons,^  but  proceeded  no  farther.  In  the 
latter  year  Sir  Greorge  Grrey,  on  behalf  of  ministers, 
suggested  as  a  compromise  between  the  contending 
parties,  that  where  church  rates  had  been  discontin- 
ued in  any  parish  for  a  certain  period, — sufficient  to 
indicate  the  settled  purpose  of  the  inhabitants, — the 
parish  should  be  exempted  from  further  liability.* 
This  suggestion,  however,  founded  upon  the  anoma- 
lies of  the  existing  law,  was  not  submitted  to  the 
decision  of  Parliament.  The  controversy  continued ; 
and  at  length,  in  1858,  a  measure,  brought  in  by 
Sir  John  Trelawny,  for  the  total  abolition  of  church 
rates,  was  passed  by  the  Commons ;  and  rejected  by 
the  Lords.^  In  1859,  another  compromise  was 
suggested,  when  Mr.  Secretary  Walpole  brought  in 
a  bill  to  facilitate  a  voluntary  provision  for  church 
rates ;  but  it  was  refused  a  second  reading  by  a  la  rge 
majority.^  In  1860,  another  abolition  bill  was 
passed  by  one  House,  and  rejected  by  the  other.^ 

'  May  26th,  1841 ;  Comm.  Joum.,  xcvi.  345,  414. 

-  June  16th,  1842;  Comm.  Journ.,  xerii.  385  ;  March  13th,  18-19; 
Md.,  civ.  134 ;  May  26th,  1853  ;  Ibid.,  eviii.  516. 

3  May  16th,  1855  :  Ayes,  217  ;  Noes,  189.  Feb.  8th,  1856  ;  Ayes, 
221  ;  Noes,  178. 

*  March  5th,  1856  ;  Hans,  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  cxl.  1900. 

*  The  third  reading  of  this  bill  was  passed  on  June  8th  by  a 
uiaiority  of  63  :  Ayes,  266  ;  Noes,  203. — Comm.  Journ.,  cxiii.  216. 

*  March  9th,  1859.  Ayes,  171 ;  Noes,  254. — Comm.  Journ., 
cxiv.  66. 

^  The  third  reading  of  this  bill  was  passed  by  a  majority  of  nine 
only.    Ayes,  235  ;  Noes,  226. — Comm.  Journ.,  cv.  208. 


Church  of  England,  209 

Other  compromises  were  suggested  by  friends  of 
the  chm:ch :  ^  but  none  found  favour,  and  Reaction  in 

ITT*  'n    •       •  1  1  favour  of 

total  abolition  was  still  insisted  upon,  by  a  the  church. 
majority  of  the  Commons.  With  ministers  it  was 
an  open  question  ;  and  between  members  and  their 
constituents,  a  source  of  constant  embarrassment. 
Meanwhile,  an  active  counter-agitation,  on  behalf  of 
the  church,  began  to  exercise  an  influence  over  the 
divisions ;  and  from  1858  the  ascendency  of  the 
anti-church-rate  party  sensibly  declined.^  Such  a 
reaction  was  obviously  favourable  to  the  final  adjust- 
ment of  the  claims  of  dissenters,  on  terms  more 
equitable  to  the  church :  but  as  yet  the  conditions  of 
such  an  adjustment  baffled  the  sagacity  of  statesmen. 

While  these  various  contentions  were  raging 
between  the  church  and  other  religious  state  of  the 
bodies,  important  changes  were  in  pro-  thre?d*?f 
gress  in  the  church,  and  in  the  religious  i^^*^  ^^^^^^^y- 
condition  of  the  people.  The  church  was  growing 
in  spiritual  influence  and  temporal  resources. 
Dissent  was  making  advances  still  more  remarkable. 

For  many  years  after  the  accession  of  Greorge  III. 
the  church  continued  her  even  course,  with  little 
change  of  condition  or  circumstances.^  She  was 
enjoying  a  tranquil,  and  apparently  prosperous,  ex- 
istence. Favoured  by  the  state  and  society: 
threatened  by  no  visible   dangers :    dominant  over 

*  Viz.  the  Archbisliop  of  Canterbury,  Mr.  Aleock,  Mr.  Cross,  Mr. 
Newdegate,  and  Mr,  Hubbard. 

2  In  1861  (beyond  the  limits  of  this  history)  the  annual  bill  was 
lost  on  the  third  reading  by  the  casting  yote  of  the  Speaker ;  in 
1862,  by  a  majority  of  17  ;  and  in  1863,  by  a  majority  of  10.  See 
also  Supplementary  Chapter. 

'  Supra,  p.  85. 
VOL.  III.  P 


2IO  Church  of  England, 

Catholics  and  dissenters ;  and  fearing  no  assaults 
upon  her  power  or  privileges,  she  was  contented  with 
the  dignified  security  of  a  national  establishment. 
The  more  learned  churchmen  devoted  themselves  to 
classical  erudition  and  scholastic  theology:  the 
parochial  clergy  to  an  easy,  but  generally  decorous, 
performance  of  their  accustomed  duties.  The 
discipline  of  the  church  was  facile  and  indulgent. 
Pluralities  and  non-residence  were  freely  permitted, 
the  ease  of  the  clergy  being  more  regarded  than  the 
spiritual  welfare  of  the  people.  The  parson  farmed, 
hunted,  shot  the  squire's  partridges,  drank  his  port 
wine,  joined  in  the  friendly  rubber,  and  frankly 
entered  into  all  the  enjoyments  of  a  country  life. 
He  was  a  kind  and  hearty  man  ;  and  if  he  had  the 
means,  his  charity  was  open-handed.  Eeady  at  the 
call  of  those  who  sought  religious  consolation,  he 
was  not  earnest  in  searching  out  the  spiritual  needs 
of  his  flock.  Zeal  was  not  expected  of  him :  society 
was  not  yet  prepared  to  exact  it. 

While  ease  and  inaction  characterised  the  church,  a 
Changes  in  ^^^^^  chauge  was  coming  over  the  religious 
SnTthe  ^iid  social  condition  of  the  people.  The 
people.  religious  movement,  commenced  by  Wcst 
ley  and  Whitefield,^  was  spreading  widely  among  the 
middle  and  humbler  classes.  An  age  of  spiritual 
lethargy  was  passing  away ;  and  a  period  of  religious 
emotion,  zeal,  and  activity  commencing.  At  the 
same  time,  the  population  of  the  country  was  attain- 
ing an  extraordinary  and  unprecedented  develop- 
ment. The  church  was  ill  prepared  to  meet  these 
new  conditions  of  society.  Her  clergy  were  slow  to 
*  Su;prat  p.  85. 


Church  of  Engla7id.  211 

perceive  tliem ;  and  when  pressed  by  the  exigencies 
of  the  time,  they  could  not  suddenly  assume  the 
character  of  missionaries.  It  was  a  new  calling,  for 
which  their  training  and  habits  unfitted  them ;  and 
they  had  to  cope  with  unexampled  difficulties.  A 
new  society  was  growing  up  around  them,  sudden 
with  startling  suddenness.  A  country  population, 
village  often  rose,  as  if  by  magic,  into  a  popu- 
lous town :  a  town  was  swollen  into  a  huge  city. 
Artisans  from  the  loom,  the  forge,  and  the  mine 
were  peopling  the  lone  valley  and  the  moor.  How 
was  the  church  at  once  to  embrace  a  populous  and 
strange  community  in  her  ministrations  ?  The 
parish  church  would  not  hold  them  if  they  were 
willing  to  come :  the  parochial  clergy  were  unequal, 
in  number  and  in  means,  to  visit  them  in  their  own 
homes.  Spoliation  and  neglect  had  doomed  a  large 
proportion  of  the  clergy  to  poverty ;  and  neither 
the  state  nor  society  had  yet  come  to  their  aid. 
If  there  were  shortcomings  on  their  part,  they  were 
shared  by  the  state,  and  the  laity.  There  was  no 
organisation  to  meet  the  pressure  of  local  wants, 
while  population  was  outgrowing  the  ordinary 
agencies  of  the  church.  The  field  which  was  be- 
coming too  wide  for  her,  was  entered  upon  by  dis- 
sent ;  and  hitherto  it  has  proved  too  wide  for  both.' 

'  It  is  computed  tliat  on  the  census  Sunday,  1851,  5,288,294  per- 
sons able  to  attend  religious  worship  once  at  least,  were  wholl^i 
absent.  And  it  has  been  reckoned  that  in  Southwark  68  per  cent,  oi 
the  population  attend  no  place  of  worship  whatever ;  in  Sheffield, 
62  ;  in  Oldham,  61|.  In  thirty-four  great  towns,  embracing  a  popu- 
lation of  3,993,467rno  less  than  2,197,388,  or  52^  per  cent.,  are  said 
to  attend  no  places  of  worship. — Br.  Himie's  Ev.  before  Lords'  Com. 
on  Church  Bates,  1859,  Q.  1290-1300. 

p  2 


2 1 2  CJmrcIi  of  Enghfid, 

In  dealing  with  rude  and  industrial  populations. 
Causes  ad-     the  clcrgy  laboured  under  many  disadvant- 

VGrSG  to 

the  clergy  ages  Compared  with  other  sects, — particu- 
of  dissent,  larly  the  Methodists, — by  whom  they  were 
environed.  However  earnest  in  their  calling,  they 
were  too  much  above  working  men  in  rank  and  edu- 
cation, to  gain  their  easy  confidence.  They  were 
gentlemen,  generally  allied  to  county  families, 
trained  at  the  universities,  and  mingling  in  refined 
society.  They  read  the  services  of  the  church  with 
grave  propriety,  and  preached  scholarlike  discourses 
without  emphasis  or  passion.  Their  well-bred  calm- 
ness and  good  taste  ministered  little  to  religious  ex- 
citement. But  hard  by  the  village  church,  a 
Methodist  carpenter  or  blacksmith  would  address 
his  humble  flock  with  passionate  devotion.  He  was 
one  of  themselves,  spoke  their  rough  dialect,  used 
their  wonted  phrases  ;  and  having  been  himself  con- 
verted to  Methodism,  described  his  own  experience 
and  consolations.  Who  can.  wonder  that  numbers 
forsook  the  decorous  monotony  of  the  church  service 
for  the  fervid  prayers  and  moving  exhortations  of  the 
Methodist  ?  Among  the  more  enlightened  popula- 
tion of  towns,  the  clergy  had  formidable  rivals  in 
a  higher  class  of  nonconformist  ministers,  who 
attracted  congregations,  not  only  by  doctrines  con- 
genial to  their  faith  and  sentiments,  but  by  a  more 
impassioned  eloquence,  greater  warmth  and  earnest- 
ness, a  plainer  language,  and  closer  relations  with 
their  flocks.  Again,  in  the  visitation  of  the  sick, 
dissent  had  greater  resources  than  the  church.  Its 
ministers  were  more  familiar  with  their  habits  and 


Church  of  England.  2 1 3 

religious  feelings ;  were  admitted  with  greater  free- 
dom to  their  homes  ;  and  were  assisted  by  an  active 
lay  agency,  which  the  church  was  slow  to  imitate. 

Social  causes  further  contributed  to  the  progress 
of  dissent.  Many  were  not  unwilling  to  social  causes 
escape  from  the  presence  of  their  superiors  in  °^  ^^^sent. 
station.  Farmers  and  shopkeepers  were  greater  men 
in  the  meeting-house,  than  under  the  shadow  of  the 
pulpit  and  the  squire's  pew.  Working  men  were 
glad  to  be  free,  for  one  day  in  the  week,  from  the 
eye  of  the  master.  It  was  a  comfort  to  be  conscious 
of  independence,  and  to  enjoy  their  devotions, — like 
their  sports, — among  themselves,  without  restraint 
or  embarrassment.  Even  their  homely  dress  tempted 
them  from  the  church  ;  as  rags  shut  out  a  lower 
grade  from  public  worship  altogether. 

In  Wales,  there  was  yet  another  inducement  to 
dissent.     Like  the  Irish  at  the  Eeforma-  ^.     ^. 

Dissent  in 

tion,  the  people  were  ignorant  of  the  Ian-  ^'^^®^- 
guage  in  which  the  services  of  the  church  were  too 
often  performed.  In  many  parishes,  the  English 
liturgy  was  read,  and  English  sermons  preached  to 
Welshmen.  Even  religious  consolations  were  minis- 
tered with  difficulty,  in  the  only  language  familiar 
to  the  people.  Addressed  by  nonconformist  teachers 
in  their  own  tongue,  numbers  were  soon  won  over. 
Doctrines  and  ceremonies  were  as  nothing  compared 
with  an  intelligible  devotion.  They  followed 
Welshmen,  rather  than  dissenters :  but  found  them- 
selves out  of  communion  with  the  church.^ 

*  For  an  account  of  the  condition  of  the  church  and  dissent  in 
Wales,  see  Wales,  by  Sir  T.  Phillix)s,  ch.  y.  vi. 


2 1 4  Ckurc/i  of  England. 

From  these  combined  causes, — religious  and 
The  church  social, — dissent  marched  onwards.  The 
eS?  church  lost  numbers  from  her  fold;  and 
society.  failed  to  embrace  multitudes  among  the 
growing  population,  beyond  her  ministrations.  But 
she  was  never  forsaken  by  the  rank,  wealth,  intellect, 
and  influence  of  the  country  ;  and  the  poor  remained 
her  uncontested  heritage.  Nobles,  and  proprietors 
of  the  soil,  were  her  zealous  disciples  and  champions  : 
the  professions, — the  first  merchants  and  employers 
of  labour,  continued  faithful.  English  society  held 
fast  to  her.  Aspirants  to  respectability  frequented 
her  services.  The  less  opulent  of  the  middle  classes, 
and  the  industrial  population,  thronged  the  meeting- 
house :  men  who  grew  rich  and  prosperous  forsook  it 
for  the  church. 

It  was  not  until  early  in  the  present  century,  that 
Eegenera-  the  rulcrs  and  clergy  of  the  church  were 
church.  awakened  to  a  sense  of  their  responsibi- 
lities, under  these  new  conditions  of  society  and 
religious  feeling.  Startled  by  the  outburst  of  infi- 
delity in  France,  and  disquieted  by  the  encroach- 
ments of  dissent, — they  at  length  discovered  that 
the  church  had  a  new  mission  before  her.  More 
zeal  was  needed  by  her  ministers  ;  better  discipline 
and  organisation  in  her  government ;  new  resources 
in  her  establishment.  The  means  she  had  must  be 
developed ;  and  the  cooperation  of  the  state  and 
laity  must  be  invoked,  to  combat  the  difficulties  by 
which  she  was  surrounded.  The  church  of  the  six- 
teenth century  must  be  adapted  to  the  population 
and  needs  of  the  nineteenth. 


Cktirck  of  England.  215 

The  first  efforts  made  for  the  regeneration  of  the 
church  were  not  very  vigorous,  but  they  were  in  the 
right  direction.  In  1803,  measures  were  passed  to 
restrain  clerical  farming,  to  enforce  the  residence  of 
incumbents,  and  to  encourage  the  building  of 
churches.^ 

Fifteen  years  later,  a  comprehensive  scheme  was 
devised  for  the  buildinsf  and  endowment  church 

„      ,  ,  .  ,         °    ,  mi  -1.        Building 

of  churches  m  populous  places.  The  dis-  Act,i8i8. 
proportion  between  the  means  of  the  church  and  the 
growing  population  was  becoming  more  and  more 
evident; 2  and  in  1818  provision  was  made  by  Par- 
liament for  a  systematic  extension  of  church  ac- 
commodation. Eelying  mainly  upon  local  liberality, 
Parliament  added  contributions  from  the  public 
revenue,  in  aid  of  the  building  and  endowment  of 
additional  churches.^  Further  encouragement  was 
also  given  by  the  remission  of  duties  upon  building 
materials."* 

The   work   of  church   extension  was   undertaken 
with   exemplary   zeal;     The   piety  of  our  church 
ancestors,  who  had  raised  churches  in  every  England. ' 
village  throughout  the  land,  was  emulated  by  the 
laity,  in  the  present  century,  who  provided  for  the 
spiritual  needs  of  their  own  time.     New  churches 

'  43  Geo.  ni.c.  84, 108  ;  and  see  Stephen's  Ecclesiastical  Statutes, 
892,  985. 

2  Lord  Sidmouth's  Life,  iii.  138;  Eeturns  laid  before  the  House 
of  Lords,  1811. 

3  58  Geo.  III.  c.  45 ;  3  Geo.  IV.  c.  72,  &c.  One  million  was  voted 
in  1813,  and  500,000^.  in  182i.  Exchequer  bill  loans  to  about  the 
same  amount  were  also  made. — Porter's  Progress,  619. 

*  In  1837  these  remissions  had  amounted  to  I70,o6n. ;  and  from 
1837  to  1845,  to  165,778^.— Pari.  Papers,  1838,  No.  325 ;  1845,  No. 
322. 


2 1 6  Church  of  England, 

arose  everywhere  among  a  growing  and  prosperous 
population ;  parishes  were  divided ;  and  endowments 
found  for  thousands  of  additional  clergy.^ 

The  poorer  clergy  have  also  received  much  wel- 
other  en-  como  assistauce  from  augmentations  of  the 
do™t8  £^^(j  known  as  Queen  Anne's  Bounty.^ 
church.  js^Qj,  ^g  ^^  unworthy  of  remark,  that  the 
general  opulence  of  the  country  has  contributed,  in 
another  form,  to  the  poorer  benefices.  Large  num- 
bers of  clergy  have  added  their  private  resources  to 
the  scant  endowments  of  their  cures ;  and  with  a 
noble  spirit  of  devotion  and  self-sacrifice,  have  dedi- 
cated their  lives  and  fortunes  to  the  service  of  the 
church. 

While  the  exertions  of  the  church  were  thus  en- 
Eccie-  courasred  by  public  and  private  liberality, 

revenues.  the  legislature  was  devismg  means  lor  de- 
veloping the  existing  resources  of  the  establishment. 
Its  revenues  were  large,  but  ill  administered,  and 
unequally  distributed.  Notwithstanding  the  spoli- 
ations of  the  sixteenth  century,  the  net   revenues 


1  Between  1801  and  1831  about  500  churches  were  built  at  an  ex- 
pense of  3,000,000/.  In  twenty  years,  from  1831  to  1851,  more  than 
two  thousand  new  churches  were  erected  at  an  expense  exceeding 
6,000,000/.  In  this  whole  period  of  fifty  years  2,529  churches  were 
built  at  an  expense  of  9,087,000/.,  of  which  1 ,663,429/.  were  contri- 
buted from  public  funds,  and  7,423,571/.  from  private  benefactions. 
— Census,  1851,  Keligious  Worship,  p.  xxxix. ;  see  also  Lords'  De- 
bate, May  11th,  1854.— Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  cxxxiii.  153.  Be- 
tween 1801  and  1858,  it  appears  that  3,150  churches  had  been  built 
at  an  expense  of  11,000,000/. — Lords'  Keport  on  Spiritual  Destitu- 
tion, 1858  ;  Cotton's  Ev.,  Q.  141. 

2  2  &  3  Anne  c.  11 ;  1  Geo.  I.  st.  2,  c.  10  ;  45  Geo.  III.  c.  84  ;  1 
&  2  Will.  IV.  c.  45,  &c.  From  1809  to  1820,  the  governors  of  Queen 
Anne's  bounty  distributed  no  less  than  1,000,000/.  to  the  poorer 
clerf^y.  From  April  5th,  1831,  to  Dec.  31st,  1835,  they  disbursed 
687^342/.    From  1850  to  1860  inclusive,  they  distributed  2,502,747/. 


Church  of  England.  217 

amounted  to  3,490,497^. ;  of  which  435,046^  was 
appropriated  by  the  bishops  and  other  dignitaries ; 
while  many  incumbents  derived  a  scanty  pittance 
from  the  ample  patrimony  of  the  church.^  Sound 
policy,  and  the  interests  of  the  church  her-  j.^^^^ 
self,  demanded  an  improved  management  cjj^^ 
and  distribution  of  this  great  income  ;  and  ^'°°'  ^^^^' 
in  1835  a  commission  was  constituted,  which,  in  five 
successive  reports,  recommended  numerous  ecclesias- 
tical reforms.  In  1836,  the  ecclesiastical  commis- 
sioners were  incorporated,^  with  power  to  prepare 
schemes  for  carrying  these  recommendations  into 
effect.  Many  reforms  in  the  church  establishment 
were  afterwards  sanctioned  by  Parliament.  The 
boundaries  of  the  several  dioceses  were  revised  :  the 
sees  of  Gloucester  and  Bristol  were  consolidated,  and 
the  new  sees  of  Manchester  and  Eipon  created :  the 
episcopal  revenues  and  patronage  were  re-adjusted.' 
The  establishments  of  cathedral  and  collegiate 
churches  were  reduced,  and  their  revenues  appropri- 
ated to  the  relief  of  spiritual  destitution.  And  the 
surplus  revenues  of  the  church,  accruing  from  all 
these  reforms,  have  since  been  applied,  under  the 
authority  of  the  commissioners,  to  the  augmentation 
of  small  livings,  and  other  purposes  designed  to  in- 
crease the  efficiency  of  the  church.'*     At  the  same 

'  Report  of  Ecclesiastical  Duties  and  Eevenues  Comm.,  1831. 

2  6  &  7  "Will.  IV.  c.  77.  The  constitution  of  the  commissioners 
was  altered  in  1840  by  3  &  4  Vict.  c.  113  ;  14  &  15  Vict.  c.  104;  23 
&  24  Vict.  c.  124. 

3  See  6  &  7  Will,  IV.  c.  77 ;  3  «Sc  4  Vict.  c.  113.  OriginaUy  the 
sees  of  St.  Asaph  and  Bangor  were  also  united;  but  the  10  and  11 
Vict,  e.  108,  which  constituted  the  bishopric  of  Manchester,  repealed 
the  provisions  concerning  the  union  of  these  sees. 

^  In  1860,  no  less  than  1,38S  benefices  and  districts  had  been  aug- 


2i8  Church  of  England. 

time  pluralities  were  more  effectually  restrained,  and 
residence  enforced,  among  the  clergy.^ 

In  extending  her  ministrations  to  a  growing  com- 
Privnte  muuity,  the  church  has  further  been  as- 
muniticence.  gig^gd  from  othcr  sourccs.  Several  charit- 
able societies  have  largely  contributed  to  this  good 
work,^  and  private  munificence, — in  an  age  not  less 
remarkable  for  its  pious  charity  than  for  its  opu- 
lence,— has  nobly  supported  the  zeal  and  devotion  of 
the  clergy. 

The  principal  revenues  of  the  church,  however. 
Tithes  com-  wore  derived  from  tithes ;  and  these  con- 
Engiand.'  tiuued  to  be  collected  by  the  clergy,  ac- 
cording to  ancient  usage,  '  in  kind.'  The  parson  was 
entitled  to  the  farmer's  tenth  wheat-sheaf,  his  tenth 
pig;,  and  his  tenth  sack  of  potatoes  !  This  primitive 
custom  of  the  Jews  was  wholly  unsuited  to  a  civilised 
age.  It  was  vexatious  to  the  farmer,  discouraging 
to  agriculture,  and  invidious  to  the  clergy.  A  large 
proportion  of  the  land  was  tithe-free;  and  tithes 
were  often  the  property  of  lay  impropriators :  yet  the^ 

mented  and  endowed,  out  of  the  common  fund  of  the  commissioners, 
to  the  extent  of  98,900^.  a  year ;  to  which  had  been  added  land  and 
tithe  rent-charge  amounting  to  9,600^.  a  year. — 14th  Eeportof  Com- 
missioners, p.  5. 

'  1  &  2  Vict.  c.  106. 

-  In  twenty-five  years  the  Church  Pastoral  Aid  Society  raised  and 
expended  715,624?.,  by  which  1015  parishes  were  aided.  In  twenty- 
four  years  the  Additional  Curates  Society  raised  and  expended 
531,110?.  In  thirty-three  years  the  Church  Building  Society  ex- 
pended 680,233?.,  which  was  met  by  a  further  expenditure,  on  the 
part  of  the  public,  of  4,451,405?. — Eeports  of  these  Societies  for 
1861. 

Independently  of  diocesan  and  other  local  societies,  the  aggre- 
gate funds  of  religious  societies  connected  with  the  church  amounted, 
in  1851,  to  upwards  of  400,000?.  a  year,  of  which  250,000?.  was 
applied  to  foreign  missions. — Census  of  1851,  Eeligious  "Worship, 
p.  xli. 


Church  of  England.  219 

church  sustained  all  the  odium  of  an  antiquated  and 
anomalous  law.  The  evil  had  long  been  acknow- 
ledged. Prior  to  the  Acts  of  Elizabeth  restraining 
alienations  of  church  property,^  landowners  had  pur- 
chased exemption  from  tithes  by  the  transfer  of 
lands  to  the  church ;  and  in  many  parishes  a  par- 
ticular custom  prevailed,  known  as  a  Tnodus,  by 
which  payment  of  tithes  in  kind  had  been  com- 
muted. The  Long  Parliament  had  desigTied  a  more 
general  commutation.^  Adam  Smith  and  Paleyhad 
pointed  out  the  injurious  operation  of  tithes ;  and 
the  latter  had  recommended  their  conversion  into 
corn-rents.^  This  suggestion  having  been  carried 
out  in  some  local  inclosure  bills,  Mr.  Pitt  submitted 
to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  in  1791,  the  pro- 
priety of  its  general  adoption:  but  unfortunately 
for  the  interests  of  the  church,  his  wise  counsels 
were  not  accepted."*  It  was  not  for  more  than  forty 
years  afterwards,  that  Parliament  perceived  the 
necessity  of  a  general  measure  of  commutation.  In 
1833  and  1834,  Lord  Althorp  submitted  imperfect 
schemes  for  consideration ;  ^  and  in  1835,  Sir  Eobert 
Peel  proposed  a  measure  to  facilitate  voluntary  com- 
mutation, which  was  obviously  inadequate.^  But  in 
1836,  a  measure,  more  comprehensive,  was  framed 
by  Lord  Melbourne's  government,  and  accepted  by 
Parliament.     It  provided  for  the  general  commuta- 

»  1  Eliz.  c.  19  ;  13  Eliz.  c.  10. 
2  Collier's  Eccl.  Hist.,  ii.  861. 
^  Moral  and  Political  Philosophy,  ch.  adi. 
*  Lord  Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt,  ii,  131. 

^  April  18th,  1833  ;  April  loth,  1834;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xTii. 
281  ;  xxii.  834. 

«  March  24th,  1835  ;  Ibid,  xxvii.  183. 


2  20  Church  of  England. 

tion  of  tithes  into  a  rent-charge  upon  the  land,  pay- 
able in  money,  but  varying  according  to  the  average 
price  of  corn,  for  seven  preceding  years.  Voluntary 
agreements  upon  this  principle  were  first  encouraged; 
and  where  none  were  made,  a  compulsory  com- 
mutation was  efifected  by  commissioners  appointed 
for  that  purpose.^  The  success  of  this  statesmanlike 
measure  was  complete.  In  fifteen  years,  the  entire 
commutation  of  tithes  was  accomplished  in  nearly 
every  parish  in  England  and  Wales.^  To  no  mea- 
sure, since  the  Eeformation,  has  the  church  owed  so 
much  peace  and  security.  All  disputes  between  the 
clergy  and  their  parishioners,  in  relation  to  tithes, 
were  averted ;  while  their  rights,  identified  with 
those  of  the  lay-impropriators,  were  secured  immut- 
ably upon  the  land  itself. 

Throughout  the  progress  of  these  various  measures 
Continued  the  church  was  gaining  strength  and  in- 
church,  fluence,  by  her  own  spiritual  renovation. 
While  the  judicious  policy  of  the  legislature  had  re- 
lieved her  from  many  causes  of  jealousy  and  ill-wiU, 
and  added  to  her  temporal  resources,  she  displayed  a 
zeal  and  activity  worthy  of  her  high  calling  and 
destinies.  Her  clergy, — earnest,  intellectual,  and 
accomplished,: — have  kept  pace  with  the  advancing 
enlightenment  of  their  age.     They  have  laboured. 


>  Feb.  9tli,  1836.  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxxi.  185 ;  6  &  7  Will. 
IV.  c.  71 ;  7  Will.  IV.  and  1  Vict.  c.  69  ;  1  «&  2  Vict.  e.  64 ;  2  &  3 
Vict.  c.  32 ;  5  &  6  Vict.  c.  54 ;  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  73  ;  10  &  11  Vict.  c. 
104;  14  &  15  Vict.  c.  53. 

-  Tn  Feb.  1851,  the  commissioners  reported  that  'the  great  work 
<?f  commutation  is  substantially  achieved.' — 1851,  No.  [1325].  In 
1852,  they  speak  of  formal  difficulties  in  about  one  hundred  cases. 
1852,  No.  [1447]. 


Church  of  England.  221 

■with  all  their  means  and  influence,  in  the  education 
of  the  people ;  and  have  joined  heartily  with  lay- 
men in  promoting,  by  secular  agencies,  the  cultiva- 
tion and  moral  welfare  of  society.  At  one  time 
there  seemed  danger  of  further  schisms,  springing 
from  controversies  which  had  been  fruitful  of  evil  at 
the  Eeformation.  The  high  church  party  leaning,  as 
of  old,  to  the  imposing  ceremonial  of  Catholic  wor- 
ship, aroused  the  apprehensions  of  those  who  perceived 
in  every  symbol  of  the  Eomish  church,  a  revival  of 
her  errors  and  superstitions.  But  the  extravagance 
of  some  of  the  clergy  was  happily  tempered  by  the 
moderation  of  others,  and  by  the  general  good  sense 
and  judgment  of  the  laity  ;  and  schism  was  averted^ 
Another  schism,  arising  out  of  the  Grorham  contro- 
versy, was  threatened  by  members  of  the  evangelical, 
or  low  church  party:  but  was  no  less  happily 
averted.  The  fold  of  the  church  has  been  found 
wide  enough  to  embrace  many  diversities  of  doctrine 
and  ceremony.  The  convictions,  doubts,  and  pre- 
dilections of  the  sixteenth  century  still  prevail,  with 
many  of  later  growth  :  but  enlightened  churchmen, 
without  absolute  identity  of  opinion,  have  been 
proud  to  acknowledge  the  same  religious  com- 
munion,— just  as  citizens,  divided  into  political 
parties,  are  yet  loyal  and  patriotic  members  of  one 
state.  And  if  the  founders  of  the  reformed  church 
erred  in  prescribing  too  strait  a  uniformity,  the 
wisest  of  her  rulers,  in  an  age  of  active  thought  and 
free  discussion,  have  generally  shown  a  tolerant  and 
cautious  spirit  in  dealing  with  theological  contro- 
versies.    The  ecclesiastical  courts  have  also  striven 


2  22  Chtirch  of  England. 

to  give  breadth  to  her  articles  and  liturgy.  Never 
was  comprehension  more  politic.  The  time  has 
come,  when  any  serious  schism  might  bring  ruin  on 
the  church. 

Such  having  been  the  progress  of  the  church, 
Progress  of  what  havo  been  the  advances  of  dissent  ? 
dissent.  -yy-g  \i2.NQ  sccu  how  widc  a  field  lay  open  to 
the  labours  of  pious  men.  A  struggle  had  to  be 
maintained  between  religion  and  heathenism  in  a 
Christian  land ;  and  in  this  struggle  dissenters  long 
bore  the  foremost  part.  They  were  at  once  preachers 
and  missionaries.  Their  work  prospered,  and  in 
combating  ignorance  and  sin,  they  grew  into  for- 
midable rivals  of  the  church.  The  old  schisms  of 
the  Reformation  had  never  lost  their  vitality.  There 
had  been  persecution  enough  to  alienate  and  provoke 
nonconformists:  but  not  enough  to  repress  them. 
And  when  they  started  on  a  new  career,  in  the  last 
century,  they  enjoyed  toleration.  The  doctrines  for 
which  many  had  formerly  suffered,  were  now  freely 
preached,  and  found  crowds  of  new  disciples.  At 
the  same  time,  freedom  of  worship  and  discussion 
favoured  the  growth  of  other  diversities  of  faith, 
ceremonial,  and  discipline. 

The  later  history  of  dissent, — of  its  rapid  growth 
statistics  of  ^^^  development, — its  marvellous  activity 
^^^"*'  and  resources, — is  to  be  read  in  its  statistics 
The  church  in  extending  her  ministrations  had  been 
aided  by  the  state ;  and  by  the  liberality  of  her 
wealthy  flocks.  Dissent  received  no  succour  or  en- 
couragement from  the  state  ;  and  its  disciples  were 
generally  drawn  from   the  less  opulent   classes    of 


Progress  of  Dissent.  223 

society.  Yet  what  has  it  done  for  the  religious  in- 
struction of  the  people  ?  In  1801,  the  Wesleyans 
had  825  chapels  or  places  of  worship:  in  1851,  they 
had  the  extraordinary  number  of  11,007,  with  sit- 
tings for  2,194,298  persons!  The  original  connec- 
tion alone  numbered  1,034  ministers,  and  upwards 
of  13,000  lay  or  local  preachers.  In  1801,  the  Inde- 
pendents had  914  chapels  :  in  1851,  they  had  3,244, 
with  sittings  for  1,067,760  members.  In  1801,  the 
Baptists  had  652  places  of  worship:  in  1851,  they 
had  2,789,  with  sittings  for  752,346.  And  numer- 
ous other  religious  denominations  swelled  the  ranks 
of  Protestant  dissent. 

The  Eoman  Catholics, — forming  a  comparatively 
small  body, — have  yet  increased  of  late  years  in 
numbers  and  activity.  Their  chapels  grew  from 
346  in  1824,  to  574  in  1851,  with  accommodation 
for  186,111  persons.  Between  1841  and  1853  their 
religious  houses  were  multiplied  from  17  to  88  ;  and 
their  priests  from  557  to  875.  Their  flocks  have 
naturally  been  enlarged  by  considerable  numbers  of 
Irish  and  foreigners  who  have  settled,  with  their  in- 
creasing families,  in  the  metropolis  and  other  large 
towns. 

For  the  population  of  England  and  Wales, 
amounting  in  1851  to  17,927,609,  there  statistics  of 
were  34,467  places  of  worship,  of  which  worswp. 
14,077  belonged  to  the  church  of  England.  Accom- 
modation was  provided  for  9,467,738  persons,  of 
whom  4,922,412  were  in  the  establishment.  On  the 
30th  of  March,  4,428,338  attended  morning  ser- 
vice,   of  whom    2,371,732    were  members    (f  the 


224  Chtii^ch  of  England. 

church.^  Hence  it  has  been  computed  that  there  were 
7,546,948  members  of  the  establishment  habitually 
attending  religious  worship ;  and  4,466,266  nominal 
members  rarely,  if  ever,  attending  the  services  of 
their  church.  These  two  classes  united,  formed 
about  67  per  cent,  of  the  population.  The  same 
computation  reckoned  2,264,324  Wesleyans,  and 
610,786  Eoman  Catholics.'^  The  clergy  of  the  es- 
tablished church  numbered  17,320 :  ministers  of 
other  communions,  6,405.^ 

So  vast  an  increase  of  dissent  has  seriously  com- 
Eeiations  promised  the  position  of  the  church,  as  a 
chSch  to  national  establishment.  Nearly  one-third 
dissent.  ^^  ^j^^  present  generation  have  grown  up 
out  of  her  communion.  But  her  power  is  yet  domi- 
nant. She  holds  her  proud  position  in  the  state 
and  society  :  she  commands  the  parochial  organisa- 
tion of  the  country :  she  has  the  largest  share  in  the 
education  of  the  people ;  *  and  she  has  long  been 
straining  every  nerve  to  extend  her  influence.  The 
traditions  and  sentiment  of  the  nation  are  on  he^' 
side.  And  while  she  comprises  a  united  body  of 
faithful  members,  dissenters  are  divided  into  up- 

*  Census  of  Great  Britain,  1851,  Eeligious  Worship.  The  pro- 
gressive increase  of  dissent  is  curiously  illustrated  by  a  return  of 
temporary  and  permanent  places  of  worship  registered  in  decennial 
periods.— Pari.  Paper,  1853,  No.  156. 

-  Dr.  Hume's  Ev.  before  Lords'  Com.  on  Church  Eates,  1859,  Q,. 
1291,  and  map.  Independents  and  Baptists  together  are  set  down 
as  9|  per  cent.,  and  other  sects  6j  on  the  population. 

^  Census,  1851  :  occupations,  table  27. 

*  In  1860  she  received  about  77  per  cent,  of  the  education  grant 
from  the  Privy  Council ;  and  of  1,549,312  pupils  in  day-schools,  she 
had  no  less  than  1,187,086;  while  of  Sunday-school  pupils  dissenters 
had  a  majority  of  200,000.— Eep.  of  Education  Com.,  1861,  p.  593, 
594  ;  Bishop  of  London's  Charge,  1862,  p.  35. 


Progress  of  Dissent.  225 

wards  of  one  hundred  different  sects,  or  congrega- 
tions, without  sympathy  or  cohesion,  and  differing 
in  doctrines,  polity,  and  forms  of  worship.  Sects, 
not  bound  by  subscription  to  any  articles  of  faith, 
have  been  rent  asunder  by  schisms.  The  Wesleyans 
have  been  broken  up  into  nine  divisions  :  ^  the 
Baptists  into  five.^  These  discordant  elements  of 
dissent  have  often  been  united  in  opposition  to  the 
church,  for  the  redress  of  grievances  common  to 
them  all.  But  every  act  of  toleration  and  justice, 
on  the  part  of  the  state,  has  tended  to  dissolve  the 
combination.  The "  odium  of  bad  laws  weighed 
heavily  upon  the  church ;  and  her  position  has  been 
strengthened  by  the  reversal  of  a  mistaken  policy. 
Nor  has  the  church  just  cause  of  apprehension  from 
any  general  sentiment  of  hostility  on  the  part  of 
Protestant  nonconformists.  Numbers  frequent  her 
services,  and  are  still  married  at  her  altars.^  The 
Wesleyans,  dwelling  just  outside  her  gates,  are 
friends  and  neighbours,  rather  than  adversaries. 
The  most  formidable  and  aggressive  of  her  opponents 
are  the  Independents.  "With  them  the  '  voluntary 
principle '  in  religion  is  a  primary  article  of  faith. 
They  condemn  all  chmxh  establishments ;  and  the 
Church  of  England  is  the  foremost  example  to  be 
denounced  and  assailed. 

*  The  Original  Connexion,  New  Connexion,  Primitive  Methodists, 
Bible.  Christians,  "Wesleyan  Methodist  Association,  Independent 
Methodists,  Wesleyan  Reformers,  Welsh  Calvinistic  Methodists,  and 
Countess  of  Huntingdon's  Connexion. 

"  General,  Particular,  Seventh-day,  Scotch,  New  Connexion 
General. 

^  Eighty  per  a^nt.  of  all  marriages  are  celebrated  by  the  church. 
— Hep.  of  Eegistrar-Gen.,  1862,  p.  viii. 

VOL.  III.  Q 


226  Church  of  England. 

Whatever  the  future  destinies  of  the  church,  the 
Relations  of  g'^^-^est  reflections  arise  out  of  the  later  de- 
S  pSua-^  velopment  of  the  Reformation.  The  church 
^^^^-  was  then  united  to  the  state.     Her  convo- 

cation, originally  dependent,  has  since  lost  all  but  a 
nominal  place  in  the  ecclesiastical  polity  of  the 
realm.  And  what  have  become  the  component 
parts  of  the  legislature  which  directs  the  govern- 
ment, discipline,  revenues, —  nay  even  the  doctrines, 
of  the  church  ?  The  Commons,  who  have  attained 
a  dominant  authority,  are  representatives  of  Eng- 
land,— one-third  nonconformists, — of  Presbyterian 
Scotland, — and  of  Catholic  Ireland.  In  the  union 
of  church  and  state  no  such  anomaly  had  been  fore- 
seen ;  yet  has.  it  been  the  natural  consequence  of  the 
Eeformation, — ^followed  by  the  consolidation  of  these 
realms,  and  the  inevitable  recognition  of  religious 
liberty  in  a  free  state. 

However  painful  the  history  of  religious  schisms 
Influence  of  ^^^  couflicts,  they  havo  not  been  without 
poTdcai"^°''  countervailing  uses.  They  have  extended 
liberty.  rcUgious  iustructiou ;  and  favoured  poli- 
tical liberty.  If  the  church  and  dissenters,  united, 
have  been  unequal  to  meet  the  spiritual  needs  of 
this  populous  land, — what  could  the  church,  alone 
and  unaided,  have  accomplished  ?  Even  if  the  re- 
sources of  dissent  had  been  placed  in  her  hands, 
rivalry  would  have  been  wanting,  which  has  stimu- 
lated the  zeal  of  both.  Liberty  owes  much  to 
schism.  It  brought  down  the  high  prerogatives  of 
the  Tudors  and  Stuarts ;  and  in  later  times,  has  been 
a  powerful  auxiliary  in  many  popular  movements. 


Progress  of  Dissent,  227 

The  undivided  power  of  the  church,  united  to  that 
of  the  crown  and  aristocracy,  might  have  proved  too 
strong  for  the  people.  But  while  she  was  weakened 
by  dissent,  a  popular  party  was  growing  up,  opposed 
to  the  close  political  organisation  with  which  she 
was  associated.  This  party  was  naturally  joined  by 
dissenters  ;  and  they  fought  side  by  side  in  the  long 
struggle  for  civil  and  religious  liberty. 

The  church  and  dissenters,  generally  opposed  on 
political  questions  affecting  religion,  have  The  Papai 

,  i  J.  1  •      J.    aggression, 

been  prompt  to  make  common  cause  against  i85o. 
the  church  of  Eome.  The  same  strong  spirit  of 
Protestantism  which  united  them  in  resistance  to 
James  II.  and  his  House,  has  since  brought  them 
together  on  other  occasions.  Dissenters,  while  seek- 
ing justice  for  themselves,  had  been  no  friends  to 
Catholic  emancipation ;  and  were  far  more  hostile 
than  churchmen  to  the  endowment  of  Maynooth.^ 
And  in  1851,  they  joined  the  church  in  resenting 
an  aggressive  movement  of  the  Pope,  which  was 
felt  to  be  an  insult  to  the  Protestant  people  of 
England. 

For  some  time  irritation  had  been  growing,  in  the 
popular  mind,  against  the  church  of  Eome.  The 
activity  of  the  priesthood  was  everywhere  apparent. 
Chapels  were  built,  and  religious  houses  founded.^ 
A  Catholic  cathedral  was  erected  in  London.  Sisters' 
of  mercy,  in  monastic  robes,  offended  the  eyes  of 
Protestants.  Tales  of  secret  proselytism  abounded. 
No  family  was  believed  to  be  safe  from  the  designs 
of  priests  and  Jesuits.      Protestant   heiresses   had 

»  See  infra,  p.  270.  «  See  swj^ra,  p.  223. 

q2 


2  28  Church  of  England. 

taken  the  veil,  and  endowed  convents :  wives  of  Pro- 
testant nobles  and  gentlemen  had  secretly  renounced 
the  faith  in  which  their  marriage  vows  were  given : 
fathers,  at  the  point  of  death,  had  disinherited  their 
own  flesh  and  blood,  to  satisfy  the  extortion  of  con- 
fessors. Young  men  at  Oxford,  in  training  for  the 
church,  had  been  perverted  to  Eomanism.  At  the 
same  time,  in  the  church  herself,  the  tractarian,  or 
high  church  clergy,  were  reverting  to  ceremonies  as- 
sociated with  that  faith;  and  several  had  been  gained 
over  to  the  church  of  Kome.  While  Protestants, 
alarmed  by  these  symptoms,  were  disposed  to  over- 
estimate their  significance,  the  ultramontane  party 
among  the  Catholics,  encouraged  by  a  trifling  and 
illusory  success,  conceived  the  extravagant  design  of 
reclaiming  Protestant  England  to  the  fold  of  the 
Catholic  church. 

In  September  1850,  Pope  Pius  IX.,  persuaded 
The  Pope's  ^^^  ^^  \at[i.q  had  como  for  asserting  his 
brief,  1800.  ancient  pretensions  within  this  realm,  pub- 
lished a  brief,  providing  for  the  ecclesiastical  go- 
vernment of  England.  Hitherto  the  church  of  Eome 
in  England  had  been  superintended  by  eight  vicars 
apostolic :  but  now  the  Pope,  considering  the  '  al- 
ready large  number  of  Catholics,'  and  'how  the 
hindrances  which  stood  in  the  way  of  the  spreading 
of  the  Catholic  faith  are  daily  being  removed,'  saw 
fit  to  establish  '  the  ordinary  form  of  episcopal  rule 
in  that  kingdom ; '  and  accordingly  divided  the 
country  into  one  metropolitan,  and  twelve  episcopal 
sees.  And  to  his  archbishop  and  bishops  he  gave 
'  all  the  rights  and  privileges  which  the  Catholic 


Papa  I  Aggression,  1850.  229 

archbishops  and  bishops,  in  other  states,  have  and 
use,  according  to  the  common  ordinances  of  the 
sacred  canons  and  apostolic  constitutions.'  Nor  did 
the  brief  omit  to  state  that  the  object  of  this  change 
was  '  the  well-being  and  advancement  of  Catholicity 
throughout  England.'  ^ 

This  was  followed  by  a  pastoral  of  Cardinal  Wise- 
man, on  his  appointment  as  Archbishop  of  cardinal 

"WisGin&ii's 

Westminster,  exulting  in  the  supposed  pastoral. 
triumph  of  his  church.  'Your  beloved  country,' 
said  he,  'has  received  a  place  among  the  fair 
churches  which,  normally  constituted,  form  the 
splendid  aggregate  of  Catholic  communion :  Catholic 
England  has  been  restored  to  its  orbit  in  the  eccle- 
siastical firmament,  from  which  its  light  had  long 
vanished,  and  begins  now  anew  its  course  of  regularly 
adjusted  action  round  the  centre  of  unity,  the  source 
of  jurisdiction,  of  light,  and  of  vigour.' ^ 

The  enthronisation  of  the  new  bishops  was  cele- 
brated with  great  pomp ;  and  exultant  ser-  catholic 
mons  were  preached  on  the  revival  of  the  enthroned. 
Catholic  church.  In  one  of  these.  Dr.  Newman, — 
himself  a  recent  convert, — declared  that  '  the  people 
of  England,  who  for  so  many  years  had  been  separated 
from  the  see  of  Eome,  are  about,  of  their  own  will, 
to  be  added  to  the  holy  church.' 

No  acts  or  language  could   have  wounded  more 
deeply  the  traditional  susceptibilities  of  the  popular  in- 
English  people.      For  three  hundred  years  ^^s^^^^^^^- 
the  papal  supremacy  had  been  renounced,  and  the 

•  Papal  Brief,  Sept.  30th,  1850 ;  Ann.  Reg.,  1850,  App.  405. 
2  Pastoral,  Oct.  7th,  1850  ;  Ann.  Eeg.,  1850,  App.  411. 


230  CJm7xh  of  England. 

Eomish  faith  held  in  abhorrence.  Even  diplomatic 
relations  with  the  sovereign  of  the  Eoman  States, — 
as  a  temporal  prince, — had  until  lately  been  for- 
bidden.^ And  now  the  Pope  had  assumed  to  parcel 
out  the  realm  into  Eomish  bishoprics ;  and  to  em- 
brace the  whole  community  in  his  jurisdiction. 
Never,  since  the  Popish  plot,  had  the  nation  been 
so  stirred  with  wrath  and  indignation.  Early  in 
November,  Lord  John  Eussell,  the  Premier,  increased 
the  public  excitement  by  a  letter  to  the  Bishop  of 
Durham,  denouncing  the  '  aggression  of  the  Pope  as 
insolent  and  insidious,'  and  associating  it  with  the 
practices  of  the  tractarian  clergy  of  the  Church  of 
England.^  Clergy  and  laity,  churchmen  and  dis- 
senters, vied  with  one  another  in  resentful  demons- 
trations ;  and  in  the  bonfires  of  the  oth  of  Novem- 
ber,— hitherto  the  sport  of  children, — the  obnoxious 
effigies  of  the  Pope  and  Cardinal  Wiseman  were  im- 
molated, amidst  the  execrations  of  the  multitude. 
No  one  could  doubt  the  Protestantism  of  England. 
Calm  observers  saw  in  these  demonstrations  ample 
proof  that  the  papal  pretensions,  however  insolent, 
were  wholly  innocuous  ;  and  Cardinal  Wiseman,  per- 
ceiving that  in  his  over-confidence  he  had  mistaken 
the  temper  of  the  people,  sought  to  moderate  their 
anger  by  a  conciliatory  address.  The  ambitious 
episcopate  now  assumed  the  modest  proportions  of 
an  arrangement  for  the  spiritual  care  of  a  small 
body  of  Eoman  Catholics. 

*  In  1848  an  Act  was  passed,  with  some  difficulty,  to  allow  diplo- 
matic relations  with  the  sovereign  of  the  Roman  States. — 11  &  12 
Vict.  c.  108  ;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xcvi.  169  ;  ci.  227,  234, 

2  Nov.  4th,  1850;  Ann.  Eeg.,  1850,  p.  198. 


Papal  Aggression,  1850.  231 

Meanwhile,  the  government  and  a  vast  majority 
of  the  people  were  determined  that  the  Difficulties 
papal  aggression  should  be  repelled ;  but  ^*  *^^  '^^^' 
how  ?  If  general  scorn  and  indignation  could  repel 
an  insult,  it  had  already  been  amply  repelled :  but 
action  was  expected  on  the  part  of  the  state ;  and 
how  was  it  to  be  taken  ?  Had  the  laws  of  England 
been  violated?  The  Catholic  Eelief  Act  of  1829 
forbade  the  assumption  of  any  titles  belonging  to 
the  bishops  of  the  Church  of  England  and  Ireland :  ^ 
but  the  titles  of  these  new  bishops  being  taken  from 
places  not  appropriated  by  existing  sees,  their  as- 
sumption was  not  illegal.  Statutes,  indeed,  were 
still  in  force  prohibiting  the  introduction  of  papal 
bulls  or  letters  into  this  country.^  But  they  had 
long  since  fallen  into  disuse  ;  and  such  communica- 
tions had  been  suffered  to  circulate,  without  molesta- 
tion, as  natural  incidents  to  the  internal  discipline 
of  the  church  of  Eome.  To  prosecute  Cardinal 
Wiseman  for  such  an  offence  would  have  been  an  act 
of  impotent  vengeance.  Safe  from  punishment,  he 
would  have  courted  martyrdom.  The  Queen's  supre- 
macy in  all  matters,  ecclesiastical  and  temporal,  was 
undoubted  :  but  had  it  been  invaded  ?  "When  Eng- 
land professed  the  Catholic  faith,  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  Pope  had  often  conflicted  with  that  of  the  crown. 
Both  were  concerned  in  the  government  of  the  same 
church :  but  now  the  spiritual  supremacy  of  the 
crown  was  exercised  over  the  church  of  England 

>  10  Geo.  IV.  c.  7,  s.  24. 

-  In  1846,  that  part  of  the  13th  Eliz.  which  attached  the  penalties 
of  treason  to  this  offence  had  been  repealed,  but  the  law  continued 
in  force. 


232  Church  of  England. 

only.  Roman  Catholics, — in  common  with  all  other 
subjects  not  in  communion  with  the  church, — enjoyed 
full  toleration  in  their  religious  worship  ;  and  it  was 
an  essential  part  of  their  faith  and  polity  to  ac- 
knowledge the  spiritual  authority  of  the  Pope. 
Could  legal  restraints,  then,  be  imposed  upon  the  in- 
ternal government  of  the  church  of  Rome,  without 
an  infraction  of  religious  toleration  ?  True,  the 
papal  brief,  in  form  and  language,  assumed  a  juris- 
diction over  the  whole  realm ;  and  Cardinal  Wise- 
man had  said  of  himself,  '  We  govern,  and  shall  con- 
tinue to  govern,  the  counties  of  Middlesex,  Hert- 
ford, and  Essex.'  But  was  this  more  than  an  appli- 
cation of  the  immutable  forms  of  the  church  of 
Rome  to  altered  circumstances?  In  governing 
Roman  Catholics,  did  the  Pope  wrest  from  the  Queen 
any  part  of  her  ecclesiastical  supremacy  ? 

Such  were  the  difficulties  of  the  case;  and 
Ecciesias-  ministers  endeavoured  to  solve  them  by 
Biii^Feb.^  legislation.  Drawing  a  broad  distinction' 
7th,  1851.  "between  the  spiritual  jurisdiction  of  the 
Pope  over  the  members  of  his  church,  and  an  as- 
sumption of  sovereignty  over  the  realm,  they  pro- 
posed to  interdict  all  ecclesiastical  titles  derived 
from  places  in  the  United  Kingdom.  Let  the 
Catholics,  they  argued,  be  governed  by  their  own 
bishops:  let  the  Pope  freely  appoint  them:  leave 
entire  liberty  to  Catholic  worship  and  polity :  but 
reserve  to  the  civil  government  of  this  country  alone, 
the  right  to  create  territorial  titles.  Upon  this  prin- 
ciple a  bill  was  introduced  into  the  House  of  Com- 
mons by  Lord  John  Russell.     The  titles  assumed  by 


Papal  Aggression,  1850.  233 

the  Catholic  bishops  were  prohibited  :  the  brief  or 
rescript  creating  them  was  declared  unlawful :  the 
acts  of  persons  bearing  them  were  void ;  and  gifts  or 
religious  endowments  acquired  by  them,  forfeited  to 
the  crown.^  These  latter  provisions  were  subse- 
quently omitted  by  ministers ;  ^  and  the  measure 
was  confined  to  the  prohibition  of  territorial  titles. 
It  was  shown  that  in  no  country  in  Europe, — 
whether  Catholic  or  Protestant, — would  the  Pope 
be  suffered  to  exercise  such  an  authority,  without  the 
consent  of  the  "state  ;  and  it  was  not  fit  that  England 
alone  should  submit  to  his  encroachments  upon  the 
civil  power.  But  as  the  bill  proceeded,  the  diffi- 
culties of  legislation  accumulated.  The  bill  em- 
braced Ireland,  where  such  titles  had  been  permitted, 
without  objection,  since  the  Eelief  Act  of  1829.  It 
would,  therefore,  withdraw  a  privilege  already  con- 
ceded to  Eoman  Catholics,  and  disturb  that  great 
settlement.  Yet,  as  the  measure  was  founded  upon 
the  necessity  of  protecting  the  sovereignty  of  the 
crown,  no  part  of  the  realm  could  be  excepted  from 
its  operation.  And  thus,  for  the  sake  of  repelling 
an  aggression  upon  Protestant  England,  Catholic 
Ireland  was  visited  with  this  new  prohibition. 

The  bill  encountered  objections,  the  most  opposite 
and  contradictory.    On  one  side,  it  was  con-  ob'ections 
demned  as  a  violation  of  religious  liberty.  *^  ^^®  ^^"* 
The  Catholics,  it  was  said,  were  everywhere  governed 
by  bishops,  to  whom  districts  were  assigned,  univer- 
sally known  as  dioceses,  and  distinguished  by  some 

'  Feb.  7th,  1851,     Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  cxiv.  187. 
2  March  7tli;  Md.,  1123. 


234  Church  of  England. 

local  designation.  To  interfere  with  the  internal 
polity  of  the  church  of  Eome  was  to  reverse  the 
policy  of  toleration,  and  might  eventually  lead  to 
the  revival  of  penal  laws.  If  there  was  insolence  in 
the  traditional  language  of  the  Court  of  Eome,  let  it 
be  repelled  by  a  royal  proclamation,  or  by  addresses 
from  both  Houses,  maintaining  Her  Majesty's  un- 
doubted prerogatives  :  but  let  not  Parliament  renew 
its  warfare  with  religious  liberty.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  was  urged  that  the  encroachments  of  the 
church  of  Eome  upon  the  temporal  pbwer  demanded 
a  more  stringent  measure  than  that  proposed, — 
severer  penalties,  and  securities  more  effectual. 

These  opposite  views  increased  the  embarrass- 
ments of  the  government,  and  imperilled  the  success 
of  the  measm-e.  For  a  time  ministers  received  the 
support  of  large  majorities  who, — differing  upon 
some  points, — were  yet  agreed  upon  the  necessity  of 
a  legislative  condemnation  of  the  recent  measures  of 
the  church  of  Eome.  But  on  the  report  of  the  bill, 
amendments  were  proposed,  by  Sir  F.  Thesiger,  to 
increase  the  stringency  of  its  provisions.  They  de- 
clared illegal,  not  only  the  particular  brief,  but  all 
similar  briefs  ;  extended  to  every  person  the  power 
of  prosecuting  for  offences,  with  the  consent  of  the 
attorney-general ;  and  made  the  introduction  of  bulls 
or  rescripts  a  penal  offence. 

Such  stringency  went  far  beyond  the  purpose  of 
ministers,  and  they  resisted  the  amendments :  but  a 
considerable  number  of  members, — chiefly  Eoman 
Catholics, — hoping  that  ministers,  if  overborne  by 
the  opposition,  would  abandon  the  bill,  retired  from 


Papal  Aggressio7i,  1850. 


-JO 


the  House  and  left  ministers  in  a  minority.  The 
amendments,  however,  were  accepted,  and  the  bill 
was  ultimately  passed.^ 

It  was  a  protest  against  an  act  of  the  Pope  which 
had  outraged  the  feelings  of  the  people  of  ^55^1^3  ^f 
England :  but  as  a  legislative  measure,  it  ^^'^  ^^• 
was  a  dead  letter.  The  church  of  Eome  receded  not 
a  step  from  her  position ;  and  Cardinal  Wiseman 
and  the  Catholic  bishops, — as  well  in  England  as  in 
Ireland, — continued  to  bear,  without  molestation,  the 
titles  conferred  upon  them  by  the  Pope.  The  ex- 
citement of  the  people,  and  acrimonious  discussions 
in  Parliament,  revived  animosities  which  recent 
legislation  had  tended  to  moderate  :  yet  these  events 
were  not  unfruitful  of  good.  They  dispelled  the 
wild  visions  of  the  ultramontane  party :  checked  the 
tractarian  movement  in  the  Church  of  England  ;  and 
demonstrated  the  sound  and  faithful  Protestantism 
of  the  people.  Nor  had  the  ultramontane  party 
any  cause  of  gratulation,  in  their  apparent  triumph 
over  the  state.  They  had  given  grave  offence  to  the 
foremost  champions  of  the  Catholic  cause :  their 
conduct  was  deplored  by  the  laity  of  their  own 
church  ;  and  they  had  increased  the  repugnance  of 
the  people  to  a  faith  which  they  had  scarcely  yet 
learned  to  tolerate. 

The  church  of  Scotland,  like  her  sister  church  of 
England,  has  also  been  rent  by  schisms,  chm-chof 
The    protracted    efforts    of    the     English  f^>^^^'- 
government   to  sustain  episcopacy  in  the  a^'i  "dissent. 

^  14  &  15  Vict.  c.  60  ;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  cxiv.  cxv.  cxvi.  passim; 
Ann.  Eeg.,  1851.  ch.  ii.  iii. 


236  Church  of  Scotland. 

establishment,^  resulted  in  the  foundation  of  a  dis- 
tinct episcopalian  church.  Comparatively  small  in 
numbers,  this  communion  embraced  a  large  proportion 
of  the  nobility  and  gentry  who  affected  the  English 
connexion,  and  disliked  the  democratic  spirit  and 
constitution  of  the  Presbyterian  church.  In  1732, 
the  establishment  was  further  weakened  by  the  re- 
tirement of  Ebenezer  Erskine,  and  an  ultra-puri- 
tanical sect,  who  founded  the  Secession  Church  of 
Scotland.*  This  was  followed  by  the  foundation  of 
another  seceding  church,  called  the  Presbytery  of 
Relief,  under  Gillespie,  Boston,  and  Colier  ;  ^  and  by 
the  growth  of  independents,  voluntaries,  and  other 
sects.  But  the  widest  schism  is  of  recent  date ;  and 
its  causes  illustrate  the  settled  principles  of  Presby- 
terian polity;  and  the  relations  of  the  church  of 
Scotland  to  the  state. 

Lay  patronage  had  been  recognised  by  the  Catholic 
History  church  iu  Scotland,  as  elsewhere  ;  but  the 
patronage.  Presbyterian  church  soon  evinced  her  re- 
pugnance to  its  continuance.  Wherever  lay  patron- 
age has  been  allowed,  it  has  been  the  proper  office  of 
the  church  to  judge  of  the  qualifications  of  the 
clergy,  presented  by  patrons.  The  patron  nominates 
to  a  benefice  ;  the  church  approves  and  inducts  the 
nominee.  But  this  limited  function,  ^hich  has  ever 
been  exercised  in  the  church  of  England,  did  not 

^  Supra,  p.  71. 

2  Cunningham's  Church  Hist,  of  Scotland,  ii.  427-440,  450-455  ; 
Moncrieff' s  Life  of  Erskine  ;  Fraser's  Life  of  Erskine ;  Thomson's 
Hist,  of  the  Secession  Church. 

'^  Cunningham's  Ch.  Hist.,  ii.  501,  513.  In  1847  the  Secession 
Church  and  the  Relief  Synod  were  amalgamated  under  the  title  of 
the  '  United  Presbyterian  Church.' 


Church  of  Scotland.  237 

satisfy  the  Scottish  reformers,  who,  in  the  spirit  of 
other  Calvinistic  churches,  claimed  for  the  people  a 
voice  in  the  nomination  of  their  own  ministers. 
Knox  went  so  far  as  to  declare,  in  his  First  Book  of 
^Discipline, — which,  however,  was  not  adopted  by  the 
church, — '  that  it  appertaineth  unto  the  people,  and 
to  every  several  congregation,  to  elect  their  minis- 
ter.' ^  The  Second  Book  of  Discipline,  adopted  as  a 
standard  of  the  church  in  1578,  qualified  this  doc- 
trine :  but  declared  '  that  no  person  should  be  in- 
truded in  any  offices  of  the  kirk  contrary  to  the  will 
of  the  congregation,  or  without  the  voice  of  the 
eldership.'  ^  But  patronage  being  a  civil  right,  the 
state  undertook  to  define  it,  and  to  prescribe  the 
functions  of  the  church.  In  1567,  the  Parliament 
declared  that  the  presentation  to  benefices  '  was  re- 
served to  the  just  and  ancient  patrons,'  while  the 
examination  and  admission  of  ministers  belonged  to 
the  church.  Should  the  induction  of  a  minister  be 
refused,  the  patron  might  appeal  to  the  Greneral 
Assembly.^  And  again,  by  an  Act  of  1592,  presby- 
teries were  required  to  receive  and  admit  whatever 
qualified  minister  was  presented  by  the  crown  or  lay 
patrons.'*  In  the  troublous  times  of  1649,  the  church 
being  paramount.  Parliament  swept  away  all  lay 
patronage  as  a  '  popish  custom.'  ^  On  the  Eestora- 
tion  it  was  revived,  and  rendered  doubly  odious  by 

'  A."D.  1560,  ch.  iv.  s.  ii.  Eobertson's  Aucliterarder  Case,  i.  22 
(Mr.  Whigham's  argument),  &c.  Buchanan's  Ten  Years'  Conflict, 
i.  47. 

'^  Ch.  iii.  s.  4  &  5  ;  and  again,  in  other  words,  ch.  xii.  s.  9  &  10. 

3  Scots  Acts,  1567,  c.  7. 

*  James  YI.,  Pari.,  xii.  c.  116. 

^  Scots  Acts,  1649,  c.  171  ;  Buchanan,  i.  98-105. 


238  Chu7xh  of  Scotland. 

the  persecutions  of  that  period.  The  Eevolution 
restored  the  ascendency  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
and  party;  and  again  patronage  was  overthrown. 
By  an  Act  of  1690,  the  elders  and  heritors  were  to 
choose  a  minister  for  the  approval  of  the  congrega- 
tion ;  and  if  the  latter  disapproved  the  choice,  they 
were  to  state  their  reasons  to  the  presbytery,  by 
whom  the  matter  was  to  be  determined.^  Unhappily 
this  settlement,  so  congenial  to  Presbyterian  tradi- 
tions and  sentiment,  was  not  suffered  to  be  perman- 
ent. At  the  Union,  the  constitution  and  existing 
rights  of  the  church  of  Scotland  were  guaranteed : 
yet  within  five  years,  the  heritors  determined  to  re- 
claim their  patronage.  The  time  was  favourable  : 
Jacobites  and  high  church  Tories  were  in  the  ascen- 
dant, who  hated  Scotch  Presbyterians  no  less  than 
English  dissenters ;  and  an  Episcopalian  Parliament 
naturally  favoured  the  claims  of  patrons.  An  Act 
was  therefore  obtained  in  1712,  repealing  the  Scotch 
Act  of  1690,  and  restoring  the  ancient  rights  of 
patronage.^  It  was  an  untoward  act,  conceived  in 
the  spirit  of  times  before  the  Eevolution.  The 
Greneral  Assembly  then  protested  against  it  as  a  vio- 
lation of  the  treaty  of  union ;  and  long  continued 
to  record  their  protest.^  The  people  of  Scotland 
were  outraged.  Their  old  strife  with  Episcopalians 
was  still  raging;  and  to  that  communion  most  of; 
the  patrons  belonged.     For  some  time  patrons  did 

»  Scots  Acts,  1690,  c.  23.  ^  \0  Anne,  c.  12. 

8  Carstares  State  Papers,  App.  796-800 ;  Cunningham's  Church 
Hist,  of  Scotland,  ii.  362.  Claim  of  Eights  of  the  Church  of  Scot- 
land, May,  1842,  p.  9  ;  D'Aubigne's  Germany,  England,  and  Scot- 
land, 377-385;  Buchanan's  Ten  Years'  Conflict,  i.  f24-133. 


Church  of  Scotland,  239 

not  venture  to  exercise  their  rights :  ministers  con- 
tinued to  be  called  by  congregations  ;  and  some  -who 
accepted  presentations  from  lay  patrons  were  de- 
graded by  the  church.^  Patronage,  at  first  a  cause 
of  contention  with  the  state  and  laity,  afterwards 
brought  strifes  into  the  church  herself.  The 
Assembly  was  frequently  at  issue  with  presby- 
teries concerning  the  induction  of  ministers.  The 
church  was  also  divided  on  the  question  of  presenta- 
tions ;  the  moderate  party,  as  it  was  called,  favour- 
ing the  rights  of  patrons,  and  the  popular  party  the 
calls  of  the  people.  To  this  cause  was  mainly  due 
the  secession  of  Ebenezer  Erskine^  and  Grillespie,^ 
and  the  foundation  of  their  rival  churches.  But 
from  about  the  middle  of  the  last  century  the  mode- 
rate party,  having  obtained  a  majority  in  the 
Assembly,  maintained  the  rights  of  patrons ;  and 
thus,  without  any  change  in  the  law,  the  Act  of  1712 
was,  at  length,  consistently  enforced.'*  A  call  by  the 
people  had  always  formed  part  of  the  ceremony  of 
induction;  and  during  the  periods  in  which  lay 
patronage  had  been  superseded,  it  had  unquestion- 
ably been  a  substantial  election  of  a  minister  by  his 
congregation.^  A  formal  call  continued  to  be  re- 
cognised :  but  presbyteries  did  not  venture  to  reject 

*  Cunningliam's  Chxirch  Hist.,  ii.  420. 

^  Cunningham's  Church  Hist,  of  Scotland,  ii.  419-446,  450-455 ; 
Thomson's  Hist,  of  the  Secession  Church ;  Moncrieff's  Life  of  Ers- 
kine  ;  Eraser's  Life  of  Erskine. 

3  Cunningham's  Church  Hist.,  ii.  601,  513. 

*  Cunningham's  Church  Hist,  of  Scotland,  ii.  491-500,  511,  537, 
558 ;  D'Aubigne's  Grermany,  England,  and  Scotland,  388-  394 ; 
Judgments  in  first  Auchterarder  case ;  Buchanan's  Ten  Years'  Con- 
flict, i.  145-165. 

*  Judgments  of  Lord  Brougham  and  the  Lord  Chancellor  in  the 
first  Auchterarder  case,  p.  239,  334,  335. 


240  Church  of  Scotla7id. 

any  qualified  person  duly  presented  by  a  patron.  At 
the  end  'of  the  century,  the  patronage  question 
appeared  to  have  been  set  at  rest.* 

But  the  enforcement  of  this  law  continued  to  be 
Lay  patron-  a  fertile  cause  of  dissent  from  the  estab- 
of  dissent,  lishmeut.  When  a  minister  was  forced 
upon  a  congregation  by  the  authority  of  the 
Presbytery  or  Greneral  Assembly,  the  people,  instead 
of  submitting  to  the  decision  of  the  church,  joined 
the  Secession  Church,  the  Presbytery  of  Relief,  or 
the  Voluntaries.^  No  people  in  Christendom  are  so 
devoted  to  the  pulpit  as  the  Scotch.  There  all  the 
services  of  their  church  are  centred.  No  liturgy 
directs  their  devotion :  the  minister  is  all  in  all  to 
them, — in  prayer,  in  exposition,  and  in  sermon.  If 
acceptable  to  his  flock,  they  join  devoutly  in  his 
prayers,  and  are  never  weary  of  his  discourses :  if 
he  finds  no  favour,  the  services  are  without  interest 
or  edification.  Hence  a  considerable  party  in  the 
church  were  persuaded  that  a  revival  of  the  ancient 
principles  of  their  faith,  which  recognised  the  poten- 
tial voice  of  the  people  in  the  appointment  of  min- 
isters, was  essential  to  the  security  of  the  establish- 
ment. 

Hostility  to  lay  patronage  was  continually  increas- 
TheVeto  ^^§''  ^^^  fouud  exprcssiou  in  petitions  and 
Act,  1834.  parliamentary  discussion.^  Meanwhile  the 
'non-intrusion  party,'  led  by  Dr.  Chalmers,  were 
gaining  ground  in  the  Greneral  Assembly :  in  1834, 

»  Cunningham's  Church  Hist,  of  Scotland,  ii,  581, 
-  Ibid. ;  Eeport  on  Church  Patronage  (Scotland),  1834,  Evidence. 
8  July  16th,  1833,  on  Mr.  Sinclair's  motion.— Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser., 
xix.  704. 


Chtcrch  of  Scotland,  241 

they  had  secured  a  majority ;  and,  without  awaiting 
remedial  measures  from  Parliament,  they  succeeded 
in  passing  the  celebrated  'Veto  Act.'^  This  Act 
declared  it  to  '  be  a  fundamental  law  of  the  church 
that  no  pastor  shall  be  intruded  on  a  congregation, 
contrary  to  the  will  of  the  people  ; '  and  provided 
that  if,  without  any  special  objections  to  the  moral 
character,  doctrine,  or  fitness  of  a  presentee,  the 
majority  of  the  male  heads  of  families  signified 
their  dissent,  the  presbytery  should,  on  that  ground 
alone,  reject  him.  Designed,  in  good  faith,  as  an 
amendment  of  the  law:  and  custom  of  the  church, 
which  the  Assembly  was  competent  to  make,  it  yet 
dealt  with  the  rights  already  defined  by  Parliament. 
Patronage  was  border  land,  which  the  church  had 
already  contested  with  the  state;  and  it  is  to  be 
lamented  that  the  Assembly, — however  well  advised 
as  to  its  own  constitutional  powers,'^ — should  thus 
have  entered  upon  it,  without  the  concurrence  of 
Parliament.  Never  was  time  so  propitious  for  tha 
candid  consideration  of  religious  questions.  Eeforms 
were  being  introduced  into  the  church ;  the  griev- 
ances of  dissenters  were  being  redressed ;  a  popular 
party  were  in  the  ascendant ;  and  agitation  had  lately 
shown  its  power  over  the  deliberations  of  the  legis- 
lature. A  Veto  Act,  or  other  compromise  sanctioned 
by  Parliament,  would  have  brought  peace  to  the 
church.     But  now  the  state  had  made  one  law  :  the 

^  For  a  full  narrative  of  all  the  circumstances  connected  with  the 
state  of  parties  in  the  Church,  and  the  passing  of  this  Act,  see  Bu- 
chanan's Ten  Years'  Conflict,  i.  174-296. 

2  The  jurisdiction  of  the  Assembly  had  been  supported  by  the 
opinion  of  the  law  officers  of  the  crown  in  Scotland. — B^ichanan, 
i.  442. 

VOL.   III.  B 


242  Church  of  Scotland. 

cliurch  another ;  and  how  far  they  were  compatible 
was  soon  brought  to  a  painful  issue. 

In  the  same  year.  Lord  Kinnoull  presented  Mr. 
Anchte-        Youug  to  the  vacaut  parish   of   Auchte- 

rarder  case,  .. 

1834-1839.  rarder  :  but  a  majority  of  the  male  heads  of 
families  having-  objected  to  his  presentation,  without 
stating  any  special  grounds  of  objection,  the  presby- 
tery refused  to  proceed  with  his  trials,  in  the  ac- 
customed form,  and  judge  of  his  qualifications. 
Mr.  Young  appealed  to  the  synod  of  Perth  and 
Stirling,  and  thence  to  the  General  Assembly ;  and 
the  presbytery  being  upheld  by  both  these  courts, 
rejected  Mr.  Young. 

Having  vainly  appealed  to  the  superior  church 
Adverse  courts.  Lord  Kinnoull  and  Mr.  Young 
if^^rivii  claimed  from  the  Court  of  Session  an  en- 
courts,  forcement  of  their  civil  rights.  They 
maintained  that  the  presbytery,  as  a  church  court, 
were  bound  to  adjudge  the  fitness  of  the  presentee, 
and  not  to  delegate  that  duty  to  the  people,  whose 
right  was  not  recognised  bylaw  ;  and  that  his  rejec- 
tion, on  account  of  the  veto,  was  illegal.  The  pres- 
bytery contended  that  admission  to  the  pastoral 
office  being  the  function  of  the  church,  she  had  a 
right  to  consider  the  veto  of  the  congregation  as  a 
test  of  fitness,  and  to  prescribe  rules  for  the  guid- 
ance of  presbyteries.  In  the  exercise  of  such 
functions  the  jurisdiction  of  the  church  was  supreme, 
and  beyond  the  control  of  the  civil  tribunals.  The 
court,  however,  held  that  neither  the  law  of  the 
church,  prior  to  the  Veto  Act,  nor  the  law  of  the 
land,  recognised   the    right  of  a    congregation   to 


Church  of  Scotland.  243 

reject  a  qualified  minister.  It  was  the  duty  of  the 
presbytery  to  judge  of  his  fitness,  on  grounds  stated 
and  examined  ;  and  the  Veto  Act,  in  conferring  such 
a  power  upon  congregations,  violated  the  civil 
and  patrimonial  rights  of  patrons,  secured  to  them 
by  statute,  and  hitherto  protected  by  the  church 
herself.  Upon  the  question  of  jurisdiction,  the 
court  maintained  its  unquestionable  authority  to  give 
redress  to  suitors  who  complained  of  a  violation  of 
their  civil  rights ;  and  while  admitting  the  com- 
petency of  the  church  to  deal  with  matters  of 
doctrine  and  discipline,  declared  that  in  trenching 
upon  civil  rights  she  had  transgressed  the  limits  of 
her  jurisdiction.  To  deny  the  right  of  the  Court  of 
Session  to  give  efiect  to  the  provisions  of  the  statute 
law,  when  contravened  by  church  courts,  was  to 
establish  the  supremacy  of  the  church  over  the  state.^ 
From  this  decision  the  presbytery  appealed  to  the 
House  of  Lords,  by  whom,  after  able  arguments  at 
the  bar,  and  masterly  judgments  from  Lord  Chancel- 
lor Cottenham  and  Lord  Brougham,  it  was,  on  every 
point  affirmed.^ 

Submission  to  the  law,  even  under  protest,  and  an 
appeal  to  the  remedial  equity  of  Parlia-  j^esistance 
ment,  might  now  have  averted  an  irrecon-  General 
cilable  conflict  between  the  civil  and  eccle-  -^^^^^^y- 
siastical  powers,  without  an  absolute  surrender  of 
principles   for  which   the  church  was   contending.. 
But  this  occasion  was  lost.     The  Assembly,  indeed, 

^  Eobertson's  Report  of  the  Auchterarder  Case,  2  vols.  8vo.  1838  ; 
Buchanan,  i.  340-487. 

'  Maclean  and  Robinson's  cases  decided  in  the  House  of  Lords, 
1839,  i.  220. 

E  2 


244  Church  of  Scotland. 

suspended  the  operation  of  tile  Veto  Act  for  a  year ; 
and  agreed  that,  so  far  as  the  temporalities  of  Auch- 
terarder  were  concerned,  the  case  was  concluded 
against  the  church.  The  manse,  the  glebe,  and  the 
stipend  should  be  given  up  :  but  whatever  concerned 
the  duties  of  a  presbytery,  in  regard  to  the  cure  of 
souls,  and  the  ministry  of  the  gospel,  was  purely 
ecclesiastical  and  beyond  the  jurisdiction  of  any 
civil  court.  A  presbytery  being  a  church  court,  ex- 
ercising spiritual  powers,  was  amenable  to  the 
Assembly  only,  and  was  not  to  be  coerced  by  the 
civil  power.  On  these  grounds  it  was  determined  to 
refuse  obedience  to  the  courts ;  and  the  hopeless 
strife  continued  between  the  two  jurisdictions,  em- 
bittered by  strong  party  differences  in  the  Assembly, 
and  among  the  laity  of  Scotland.  Parliament 
alone  could  have  stayed  it :  but  the  resistance  of  the 
church  forbade  its  interposition ;  and  a  compromise, 
proposed  by  Lord  Aberdeen,  was  rejected  by  the 
Assembly. 

The  judgment  of  the  Court  of  Session  having  been 
Second  affirmed,  the  presbytery  were  directed  to 
dercase.  make  trial  01  the  qualifications  of  Mr. 
Young :  but  they  again  refused.  For  this  refusal 
Lord  KinnouU  and  Mr.  Young  brought  an  action  for 
damages,  in  the  Court  of  Session,  against  the  ma- 
jority of  the  presbytery ;  and  obtained  a  unanimous 
decision  that  they  were  entitled  to  pecuniary  redress 
for  the  civil  wrongs  they  had  sustained.  On  appeal 
to  the  House  of  Lords,  this  judgment  also  was  unani- 
mously affirmed.^      In  other  cases,  the  Court  of  Ses- 

'  July  nth,  1842.  Bell's  Cases  decided  in  the  House  of  Lords, 
i.  662. 


Chtcrch  of  Scotland,  245 

sion  interfered  in  a  more  peremptory  form.     The 
presbytery  of   Dunkeld,  having  inducted  ^ethendy 
a  minister  to  the  parish  of  Lethendy,  in  *^^ 
defiance  of  an  interdict  from  the  Court  of  Session, 
were  brought   up  before  that  court,  and  Daviotcase, 
narrowly    escaped    imprisonment.^       The  1839. 
crown  presented  Mr.  Mackintosh  to  the  living  of 
Daviot  and  Dunlichity :    when  several  parishioners, 
who   had   been  canvassing   for   another   candidate, 
whose  claims  they  had  vainly  pressed  upon  the  secre- 
tary of  state,  prepared  to  exercise  a  veto.     But  as 
such  a  proceeding  had  been  pronounced  illegal  by 
the  House  of  Lords,  Mr.  Mackintosh  obtained  from 
the  Court  of  Session  a  decree  interdicting  tne  heads 
of  families   from  appearing  before  the  presbytery, 
and  declaring  their  dissent  without  assigning  special 
objections.^ 

While  this  litigation  was  proceeding,  the  civil  and 
ecclesiastical  authorities  were  brought  into  ^^  stxath- 
more  direct  and  violent  collision.  Mr.  tjogie  cases. 
Edwards  was  presented,  by  the  trustees  of  Lord  Fife, 
to  the  living  of  Marnoch,  in  the  presbytery  of 
Strathbogie :  but  a  majority  of  the  male  heads  of 
families  having  signified  their  veto,  the  seven  minis- 
ters constituting  the  presbytery,  in  obedience  to  the 
law  of  the  church  and  an  order  of  the  Greneral  As- 
sembly, refused  to  admit  him  to  his  trials.  Mr. 
Edwards  appealed  to  the  Court  of  Session,  and  ob- 
tained a  decree  directing  the  presbytery  to  admit 
him  to  the  living,  if  found  qualified.     The  ministers 

'  Buchanan,  ii.  1-17. 

*  Dunlop,  Bell,  and  3Iurray's  Eeports,  ii.  253. 


246  C/mrck  of  Scotland. 

of  the  presbytery  were  now  placed  in  the  painful 
dilemma  of  being  obliged  to  disobey  either  the  de- 
cree of  the  civil  court,  or  the  order  of  the  supreme 
court  of  the  church.  In  one  case  they  would  be 
punished  for  contempt ;  in  the  other  for  contumacy. 
Prohibited  by  a  commission  of  Assembly  from  pro- 
ceeding further,  before  the  next  Greneral  Assembly, 
they  nevertheless  resolved,  as  ministers  of  the  es- 
tablished church,  sworn  to  pay  allegiance  to  the 
crown,  to  render  obedience  to  the  law,  constitution- 
ally intei-preted  and  declared.  For  this  offence 
against  the  church  they  were  suspended  by  the  com- 
mission  of  Assembly;  and  their  proceedings  as  a 
presbytery  were  annulled.^ 

The  Court  of  Session,  thus  defied  by  the  church, 
The  strath-  suspcudcd  the  exocutiou  of  the  sentence  of 
steS^Feb!"  ^^^  commissiou  of  Assembly  against  the 
14th,  1840.  suspended  ministers,  prohibited  the  service 
of  the  sentence  of  suspension,  and  forbade  other 
ministers  from  preaching  or  intruding  into  their 
churches  or  schools.^  These  proceedings  being  re- 
ported to  the  Greneral  Assembly,  that  body  approved 
of  the  acts  of  the  commission, — fm-ther  suspended 
the  ministers,  and  again  provided  for  the  perform- 
ance of  their  parochial  duties.  Again  the  Court 
of  Session  interfered,  and  prohibited  the  execution 
of  these  acts  of  the  Assembly,  which  were  in  open 

»  Dec.  nth,  1839. 

2  Diinlop,  Bell,  and  Murray's  Reports,  ii.  258,  585.  Lord  Grillies 
on  the  question  of  jurisdiction,  said :  *  The  pretensions  of  the  church 
of  Scotland,  at  present,  are  exactly  those  of  the  Papal  See  a  few 
centiiries  ago.  They  not  only  decline  the  jurisdiction  of  the  civil 
courts,  but  they  deny  that  Parliament  can  bind  them  by  a  law  which 
they  choose  to  say  is  inconsistent  with  the  law  of  Christ.* 


Church  of  Scotland,  247 

defiance  of  its  previous  interdicts.'  The  cliurch 
was  in  no  mood  to  abate  her  pretensions.  Hitherto 
the  members  of  the  Strathbogie  presbytery  had  been 
under  sentence  of  suspension  only.  They  had  vainly 
sought  protection  from  Parliament;  and  on  the 
27th  of  May  1841,  the  Greneral  Assembly  deposed 
them  from  the  ministry.  Dr.  Chalmers,  in  moving 
their  deposition,  betrayed  the  spirit  which  animated 
that  Assembly,  and  the  dangers  which  were  now 
threatening  the  establishment.  'The  church  of 
Scotland,'  he  said,  '  can  never  give  way,  and  will 
sooner  give  up  her  existence  as  a  national  establish- 
ment, than  give  up  her  powers  as  a  self-acting  and 
self-regulating  body,  to  do  what  in  her  judgment  is 
best  for  the  honour  of  the  Eedeemer,  and  the  inte- 
rest of  his  kingdom  upon  earth.'  ^  It  was  evident 
that  the  ruling  party  in  the  Assembly  were  prepared 
to  resist  the  civil  authority  at  all  hazards. 

The  contest  between  the  civil  and  ecclesiastical 
jurisdictions  was  now  pushed  still  further.  The  stxath- 
The  majority  of  the  presbytery  of  Strath-  missioners. 
bogie,  who  had  been  deposed  by  the  Greneral 
Assembly,  but  reinstated  by  the  Court  of  Session, 
elected  commissioners  to  the  Greneral  Assembly :  the 
minority  elected  others.  The  Court  of  Session  in- 
terdicted the  commissioners  elected  by  the  minority, 
from  taking  their  seats  in  the  Assembly.^      And  in 

'  June  nth,  1840.  Dunlop,  Bell,  and  Murray's  Eeports,  ii.  1047, 
1380. 

2  Ann.  Eeg.,  1841,  p.  71-73;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  Ivii.  1377  ;  Iviii. 
1503;  Buchanan,  ii.  17-285. 

3  May  27th,  1842.  Dunlop,  Bell,  and  Murray's  Eeport,  iv.  1298. 
Lord  Fullerton,  who  differed  from  the  majority  of  the  court,  said : 
*  According  to  my  present  impression,  this  court  has  no  more  right 


24S  Church  of  Scotland. 

restraining  tlie  contumacy  of  these  refractory  com- 
missioners, the  civil  court  was  forced  to  adjudge  the 
constitution  and  rights  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Assem- 
bly. All  these  decisions  were  founded  on  the  prin- 
ciple that  ministers  and  members  of  the  Church  of 
Scotland  were  not  to  be  permitted  to  refuse  obedi- 
ence to  the  decrees  of  the  civil  courts  of  the  realm, 
or  to  claim  the  exercise  of  rights  which  those  courts 
had  pronounced  illegal.  The  church  regarded  them 
as  encroachments  upon  her  spiritual  functions. 

It  was  plain  that  such  a  conflict  of  jurisdictions 
Claim  and  couM  uot  cudurc  much  longer.  One  or  the 
of  General  othor  must  yield  :  or  the  legislature  must 
May  1842.'  interfere  to  prevent  confusion  and  anarchy. 
In  May  1842,  the  Greneral  Assembly  presented  to 
Her  Majesty  a  claim,  declaration,  and  protest,  com- 
plaining of  encroachments  by  the  Court  of  Session  ; 
and  also  an  address,  praying  for  the  abolition  of 
patronage.  These  communications  were  followed  by 
a  memorial  to  Sir  Eobert  Peel  and  the  other  mem- 
bers of  his  government,  praying  for  an  answer  to  the 
complaints  of  the  church,  which,  if  not  redressed, 
would  inevitably  result  in  the  disruption  of  the  es- 
tablishment. On  behalf  of  the  government,  Sir 
Answer  of  James  Grraham,  Secretary  of  State  for  the 
Graham,       Homc  Department,  returned  a  reply,  stern 

Jan.  4th,  i  i  t  •  i  -i  « 

1843.  and  unbending  m  tone,  and  with  more  of 

rebuke  than  conciliation.  The  aggression,  he  said, 
had  originated  with  the  Assembly,  who  had  passed 

to  grant  such  an  interdict,  than  to  interdict  any  persons  from  taking 
their  seats  and  acting  and  voting  as  members  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons.'— lb\d. 


Church  of  Scotland,  249 

tlie  illegal  Veto  Act,  wliicli  was  incompatible  with 
the  rights  of  patrons  as  secured  by  statute.  By  the 
standards  of  the  church,  the  Assembly  were  restrained 
from  meddling  with  civil  jurisdiction :  yet  they  had 
assumed  to  contravene  an  Act  of  Parliament,  and  to 
resist  the  decrees  of  the  Court  of  Session, — the  legal 
expositor  of  the  intentions  of  the  legislature.  The 
existing  law  respected  the  rights  of  patrons  to  pre- 
sent, of  the  congregation  to  object,  and  of  the  church 
courts  to  hear  and  judge, — to  admit  or  reject  the 
candidate.  But  the  Veto  Act  deprived  the  patrons 
of  their  rights,  and  transferred  them  to  the  congre- 
gations. The  government  were  determined  to  up- 
hold established  rights,  and  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
civil  courts :  and  would  certainly  not  consent  to  the 
abolition  of  patronage.  To  this  letter  the  Greneral 
Assembly  returned  an  answer  of  extraordinary  logi- 
cal force :  but  the  controversy  had  reached  a  point 
beyond  the  domain  of  argument.^ 

The  church  was  hopelessly  at  issue  with  the  civil 
power.   Nor  was  patronage  the  only  ground  Q^^oadBaa-a 
of  conflict.      The  General  Assembly  had  S^fSJ?', 
admitted   the   ministers   of  quoad  sacra  ■^^^^' 
parishes   and  chapels  of  ease,  to  the  privileges  of 
the  parochial  clergy,  including  the  right  of  sitting 
in  the  Assembly,  and  other  church  courts.^     The 
legality  of  the  acts  of  the  Assembly  was  called  in 
question ;  and  in  January  1843,  the  Court  of  Session 
adjudged  them  to  be  illegal.^     On  the  meeting  of 

*  Papers  presented  in  answer  to  addresses  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, Peb.  9th  and  10th,  1843  ;  Buchanan,  ii.  357. 
2  Acts  of  Assembly,  1833,  1834,  1837,  and  1839. 
^  Stewarton  Case,  Bell,  Murray,  &c.,  Eeports,  iv.  427. 


250  Chitrch  of  Scotland, 

the  Assembly  on  the  31st  of  January,  a  motion  was 
made,  by  Dr.  Cook,  to  exclude  the  quoad  sacra 
ministers  from  that  body,  as  disqualified  by  law : 
but  it  was  lost  by  a  majority  of  ninety-two.  Dr, 
Cook,  and  the  minority,  protesting  against  the 
illegal  constitution  of  the  Assembly,  withdrew; 
and  the  quoad  sacra  ministers  retained  their  seats, 
in  defiance  of  the  Court  of  Session.  The  conflict 
was  approaching  its  crisis  ;  and,  in  the  last  resort, 
the  Assembly  agreed  upon  a  petition  to  Parliament, 
complaining  of  the  encroachments  of  the  civil  courts 
upon  the  spiritual  jmisdiction  of  the  church,  and  of 
the  grievance  of  patronage. 

This  petition  was  brought  under  the  consideration 
Petition  of  of  the  Commons,  by  Mr.  Fox  Maule.  He 
Assembly,      ablv   presented    the   entire    case   for   the 

March  7th,  *^      ^ 

1S43.  church ;  and  the  debate  elicited  the  opi- 

nions of  ministers,  and  the  most  eminent  members 
of  all  parties.  Amid  expressions  of  respect  for  the 
church,  and  appreciation  of  the  learning,  piety,  and 
earnestness  of  her  rulers,  a  sentiment  prevailed  that 
until  the  Greneral  Assembly  had  rescinded  the  Veto 
Act,  in  deference  to  the  decision  of  the  House  of 
Lords,  the  interposition  of  Parliament  could  scarcely 
be  claimed,  on  her  behalf.  She  had  taken  up  her 
position,  in  open  defiance  of  the  civil  authority ; 
and  nothing  would  satisfy  her  claims  but  submission 
to  her  spiritual  jurisdiction.  Some  legislation  might 
yet  be  possible  :  but  this  petition  assumed  a  recog- 
nition of  the  claims  of  the  church,  to  which  the 
majority  of  the  House  were  not  prepared  to  assent* 
Sir  Eobert  Peel  regarded  these  claims  as  involving 


Ckttrch  of  Scotland.  251 

'  the  establishment  of  an  ecclesiastical  domination, 
in  defiance  of  law,'  which  'could  not  be  acceded  to 
without  the  utmost  ultimate  danger,  both  to  the 
religious  liberties  and  civil  rights  of  the  people.' 
The  House  concurred  in  this  opinion,  and  declined 
to  entertain  the  claims  of  the  church  by  a  majority 
of  one  hundred  and  thirty-five.* 

This  decision  was  accepted  by  the  non-intrusion 
party  as  conclusive  ;  and  preparations  were  ^^ 
immediately  made  for  their  secession  from  m^^isSi, 
the  church.2  The  Greneral  Assembly  met  ^^^'^' 
on  the  18th  May,  when  a  protest  was  read  by  the 
moderator,  signed  by  169  commissioners  of  the 
Assembly,  including  quoad  sacra  ministers  and  lay 
elders.  This  protest  declared  the  jurisdiction  as- 
sumed by  the  civil  courts  to  be  '  inconsistent  with 
Christian  liberty,  and  with  the  authority  which  the 
Head  of  the  church  hath  conferred  on  the  church 
alone.'  It  stated  that  the  word  and  will  of  the 
state  having  recently  been  declared  that  submission 
to  the  civil  courts  formed  a  condition  of  the  esta- 
blishment, they  could  not,  without  sin,  continue  to 
retain  the  benefits  of  the  establishment  to  which 
such  condition  was  attached,  and  would  therefore 
withdraw  from  it, — retaining,  however,  the  con- 
fession of  faith  and  standards  of  the  church.  After 
the  reading  of  this  protest,  the  remonstrants  with- 

^  Ayes,  76;  Noes,  211.  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  Ixvii.  354,  441. 
See  also  debate  in  the  Lords  on  Lord  Campbell's  resolutions, 
March  31  ;  Ihid.,  Ixviii.  218 ;  Debate  on  Quoad  Sacra  Ministers, 
May  9th  ;  Ibid.,  Ixix.  12. 

-  Minute  of  Special  Commission  of  the  G-eneral  Assembly,  March 
20th ;  Ann.  Eeg.»  1843,  p.  245 ;  Buchanan,  ii.  427. 


252  Chtirch  of  Scotla?id. 

drew  from  the  Assembly ;  and  joined  by  many  other 
ministers,  constituted  the '  Free  Church  of  Scotland.' 
Their  schism  was  founded  on  the  first  principles  of 
the  Presbyterian  polity, — repugnance  to  lay  patron- 
age, and  repudiation  of  the  civil  jurisdiction,  in 
ecclesiastical  affairs.  These  principles, — at  issue 
from  the  very  foundation  of  the  church, — had  now 
torn  her  asunder.  ^ 

A  few  days  afterwards,  the  Greneral  Assembly  re- 
vetoAct  scinded  the  Veto  Act,  and  the  act  ad- 
rescinded.  mittiug  quoad  sacra  ministers  to  that 
court ;  and  annulled  the  sentences  upon  the  Strath- 
bogie  ministers.  The  seceders  were  further  declared 
to  have  ceased  to  be  members  of  the  church,  and 
their  endowments  were  pronounced  vacant.^  The 
chm'ch  thus  submitted  herself,  once  more,  to  the 
authority  of  the  law  ;  and  renewed  her  loyal  alliance 
with  the  state. 

The  secession  embraced  more  than  a  third  of  the 
The  Free  clcrgy  of  the  church  of  Scotland,  and  after- 
scotiand.  wards  received  considerable  accessions  of 
strength.^  Some  of  the  most  eminent  of  the  clergy, 
— ^including  Dr.  Chalmers  and  Dr.  Candlish, — were 
its  leaders.  Their  eloquence  and  character  insured 
the  popularity  of  the  movement ;  and  those  who 
denied  the  justice  of  their  cause,  and  blamed  them 

*  Sydow's  Scottish  Chureli  Question,  1845 ;  D'Aubigne's  Germany, 
England,  and  Scotland,  377-459 ;  Buchanan's  Ten  Years'  Conflict, 
433-449. 

2  Ann.  Reg.,  1843,  p.  250;  D'Aubigne's  Germany,  England,  and 
Scotland,  443-459. 

3  Of  947  parish  ministers,  214  seceded ;  and  of  246  quoad  sacra 
ministers,  144  seceded.— Ann.  Reg.,  1843,  p.  255 ;  Speech  of  Lord 
Aberdeen,  June  13th,  1843  ;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  Ixix.  1414;  Bu- 
chanan, ii.  464,  468  ;  Hannay's  Life  of  Dr.  Chalmers. 


Church  of  Scotland.  253 

as  the  authors  of  a  grievous  schism,  could  not  but 
admire  their  earnestness  and  noble  self-denial.  Men 
highly  honoured  in  the  church,  had  sacrificed  all 
they  most  valued,  to  a  principle  which  they  con- 
scientiously believed  to  demand  that  sacrifice.  Their 
once  crowded  churches  were  surrendered  to  others, 
while  they  went  forth  to  preach  on  the  hill-side,  in 
tents,  in  barns,  and  stables.  But  they  relied,  with 
just  confidence,  upon  the  sympathies  and  liberality 
of  their  flocks ;  ^  and  in  a  few  years  the  spires  of 
their  free  kirks  were  to  be  seen  in  most  of  th§ 
parishes  of  Scotland. 

When  this  lamentable  secession  had  been  accom- 
plished, the  government  at  length  under-  p^^^^^ 
took  to  legislate  upon  the  vexed  question  ■^'^*'  i^^^- 
of  patronage.  In  1840,  Lord  Aberdeen  had  proposed 
a  bill,  in  the  vain  hope  of  reconciling  the  conflicting 
views  of  the  two  parties  in  the  church ;  and  this 
bill  he  now  offered,  with  amendments,  as  a  settle- 
ment of  the  claims  of  patrons,  the  church,  and  the 
people.  The  Veto  Act  had  been  pronounced  illegal, 
as  it  delegated  to  the  people  the  functions  of  the 
church  courts ;  and  in  giving  the  judgment  of  the 
House  of  Lords,  it  had  been  laid  down  that  a  pres- 
bytery in  judging  of  the  qualifications  of  a  minister 
were  restricted  to  an  inquiry  into  his  '  life,  literature, 
and  doctrine.'  The  bill,  while  denying  a  capricious 
veto  to  the  people,  recognised  their  right  of  objecting 

*  In  eighteen  years  they  contributed  1,251,458?.  for  the  building 
of  churches,  manses,  and  schools ;  and  for  all  the  purposes  of  their 
new  establishment  no  less  a  sum  than  5,229,631?.  —Tabular  abstracts 
of  sums  contributed  to  Free  Church  of  Scotland  to  1858-1859,  with 
MS.  additions  for  the  two  following  years,  obtained  through  the 
kindness  of  ]Mr.  Dunlop,  M.P. 


:254  Chu7xh  of  Scotland. 

to  a  presentation,  in  respect  of  'ministerial  gifts 
and  qualities,  either  in  general,  or  with  reference  to 
that  particular  parish ; '  of  which  objections  the 
presbytery  were  to  judge.  In  other  words,  they 
might  show  that  a  minister,  whatever  his  general 
qualifications,  was  unfitted  for  a  particular  parish. 
He  might  be  ignorant  of  Graelic,  among  a  Gaelic 
population :  or  too  weak  in  voice  to  preach  in  a 
large  church :  or  too  infirm  of  limb  to  visit  the  sick 
in  rough  Highland  glens.  It  was  argued,  that  with 
so  wide  a  field  of  objection,  the  veto  was  practically 
transferred  from  the  people  to  the  presbytery ;  and 
that  the  bill  being  partly  declaratory,  amounted 
to  a  partial  reversal  of  the  judgment  of  the  Lords  in 
the  Auchterarder  case.  But  after  learned  discus- 
sions in  both  Houses,  it  was  passed  by  Parliament, 
in  the  hope  of  satisfying  the  reasonable  wishes  of 
the  moderate  party  in  the  church,  who  respected  the 
rights  of  patrons,  yet  clung  to  the  Calvinistic  prin- 
ciple which  recognised  the  concurrence  of  the  people.^ 
To  the  people  was  now  given  the  full  privilege  of 
objection ;  and  to  the  church  judicatories  the  ex- 
clusive right  of  judgment. 

The  secession  of  1843,  following  prior  schisms, 
Religious  augmented  the  religious  disunion  of  Scot- 
scotiand.  land ;  and  placed  a  large  majority  of  the 
people  out  of  communion  with  the  state  church, — 
which  the  nation  itself  had  founded  at  the  Eeforma- 
tion.* 

»  Lords'  Deb.,  June  13th,  July  3rd,  17tli,  1843 ;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd 
Ser.,  Ixix.  1400;  Ixx.  534,  1202;  Commons  Deb.,  July  31st,  Aug. 
10th,  1843  ;  Hans.  Deb.,  Ixxi.  10,  517  ;  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  61 ;  Buchanan, 
ii.  458. 

2  In  1851,  of  3,395  places  of  worship,  1,183  belonged  to  thcEstab- 


Church  in  Irela^id.  255 

Let  us  now  turn,  once  more,  to  the  history  of  the 
church  in  Ireland.  Originally  the  church  of  chnrchm 
a  minority,  she  had  never  extended  her  fold,  ^^ei^^**- 
On  the  contrary,  the  rapid  multiplication  of  the 
Catholic  peasantry  had  increased  the  disproportion 
between  the  members  of  her  communion,  and  a 
populous  nation.  At  the  Union,  indeed,  she  had 
been  united  to  her  powerful  sister  church  in 
England  ;  ^  and  the  weakness  of  one  gained  support 
from  the  strength  of  the  other.  The  law  had  joined 
them  together;  and  constitutionally  they  became 
one  church.  But  no  law  could  change  the  essential 
character  of  the  Irish  Establishment,  or  its  relations 
to  the  people  of  that  country.  In  vain  were  Eng- 
lish Protestants  reckoned  among  its  members.  No 
theory  could  disturb  the  proportion  of  Protestants 
and  Catholics  in  Ireland.  While  the  great  body  of 
the  people  were  denied  the  rights  of  British  subjects, 
on  account  of  their  religion,  that  grievance  had 
caused  the  loudest  complaints.  But  in  the  midst  of 
the  sufferings  and  discontents  of  that  unhappy  land, 
jealousy  of  the  Protestant  church,  aversion  to  her 
endowed  clergy,  and  repugnance  to  contribute  to  the 
maintenance  of  the  established  religion,  were  ever 
proclaimed  as  prominent  causes  of  disaffection  and 
outrage. 

lished  Church ;  889  to  the  Free  Church  ;  465  to  the  United  Presby- 
terian Church  ;  112  to  the  Episcopal  Church;  104  to  Koman  Catho- 
lics ;  and  642  to  other  religious  denominations,  embracing  most  of 
the  sects  of  English  dissenters.  On  the  census  Sunday  228,757 
attended  the  morning  service  of  the  Established  Church ;  and  no 
less  than  255,482  that  of  the  Free  Church  (Census  Keturns,  1851). 
In  1860,  the  latter  had  234,953  communicants. 
'  Act  of  Union,  Art.  5. 


256  Church  in  Ireland. 

Foremost  among  the  evils  by  which  the  church 
Resistance  ^^^  ^^  people  woro  afflicted,  was  the  law 
to  tithes.  of  tithes.  However  impolitic  in  England,^ 
its  policy  was  aggravated  by  the  peculiar  condition 
of  Ireland.  In  the  one  country,  tithes  were  collected 
from  a  few  thriving  farmers, — generally  members  of 
the  church :  in  the  other,  they  were  levied  upon 
vast  numbers  of  cottier  tenants, — miserably  poor, 
and  generally  Catholics.^  Hence,  the  levy  of  tithes, 
in  kind,  provoked  painful  conflicts  between  the 
clergy  and  the  peasantry.  Statesmen  had  long 
viewed  the  law  of  tithes  with  anxiety.  So  far  back 
as  1786,  Mr.  Pitt  had  suggested  the  propriety  of  a 
general  commutation,  as  a  measure  calculated  to  re- 
move grievances  and  strengthen  the  interests  of  the 
church.^  In  1807,  the  Duke  of  Bedford,  attributing 
most  of  the  disorders  of  the  country  to  the  rigid 
exaction  of  tithes,  had  recommended  their  conversion 
into  a  land  tax,  and  ultimately  into  land.*  Ee- 
peated  discussions  in  Parliament  had  revealed  the 
magnitude  of  the  evils  incident  to  the  law.  Sir 
John  Newport,  in  1822,^  and  Sir  Henry  Parnell,  in 
1823,^  had  exposed  them.     In   1824,  Lord  Althorp 

»  iSfw^ra,  p.  218. 

2  In  one  parish  200?.  were  contributed  by  1,600  persons;  in  an- 
other 700?.,  by  no  less  than  2,000. — Second  Keport  of  Com- 
mons Committee,  1832.  In  a  parish  in  the  county  of  Carlow,  out  of 
446. tithe-payers  221  paid  sums  under  ^d.;  and  out  of  a  body  of 
7,005,  in  several  parishes,  one-third  paid  less  than  9c?.  each. — Mr. 
Littleton's  Speech,  Feb.  20th,  1834. 

3  Letter  to  the  Duke  of  Kutland ;  Lord  Stanhope's  Life,  i.  319. 
See  also  Lord  Castlereagh's  Corr.,  iv.  193  (1801). 

*  Speech  of  Lord  J.  Kussell,  June  23rd,  1834 ;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd 
Ser.,  xxiv.  798. 

*  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  vi.  1475;  Mr.  Hume  also,  March  4th, 
1823  ;  Ibid.,  viii.  367. 

*  Ibid.,  ix.  1175. 


Chtirch  in  Ireland.  257 

and  JMr.  Hume  had  given  them  a  prominent  place 
among  the  grievances  of  Ireland.^  The  evils  were 
notorious,  and  remaining  without  correction,  grew 
chronic  and  incurable.  The  peasants  were  taught 
by  their  own  priesthood,  and  by  a  long  course  of 
political  agitation,  to  resent  the  demands  of  the 
clergy  as  unjust :  their  poverty  aggravated  the  bur- 
den ;  and  their  numbers  rendered  the  collection  of 
tithes  not  only  difficult,  but  dangerous.  It  could 
only  be  attempted  by  tithe-proctors, — men  of  des- 
perate character  and  fortunes,  whose  hazardous  ser- 
vices hardened  their  hearts  against  the  people, — and 
whose  rigorous  execution  of  the  law  increased  its 
unpopularity.  To  mitigate  these  disorders,  an  Act 
was  passed,  in  1824,  for  the  voluntary  composition 
of  tithes :  but  the  remedy  was  partial ;  and  resist- 
ance and  conflicts  continued  to  increase  with  the 
bitterness  of  the  strife,  that  raged  between  Protest- 
ants and  Catholics.  At  length,  in  1831,  the  col- 
lection of  tithes  in  many  parishes  became  imprac- 
ticable. The  clergy  received  the  aid  of  the  police, 
and  even  of  the  military :  but  in  vain.  Tithe-proc- 
tors were  murdered ;  and  many  lives  were  lost,  in 
collisions  between  the  police  and  the  peasantry. 
Men,  not  unwilling  to  pay  what  they  knew  to  be 
lawful,  were  intimidated  and  coerced  by  the  more 
violent  enemies  of  the  church.  Tithes  could  only 
be  collected  at  the  point  of  the  bayonet ;  and  a  civil 
war  seemed  impending  over  a  country,  which  for 
centuries  had  been  wasted  by  conquests,  rebellions, 
and  internecine  strife.  The  clergy  shrank  from  the 
'  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xi.  547,  660. 
VOL.  III.  S 


258  Church  in  Ireland. 

shedding  of  blood  in  their  service ;  and  abandoned 
their  claims  upon  a  refractory  and  desperate  people. 
The  law  was  at  fault ;  and  the  clergy,  deprived 
Provision  of  their  legal  maintenance,  were  starving, 
clergy,         or  dependent  upon  private  charity.'     That 

1832- 

i«33.  the  law  must  be  reviewed,  was  manifest : 

but  in  the  meantime,  immediate  provision  was 
needed  for  the  clergy.  The  state,  unable  to  pro- 
tect them  in  the  enforcement  of  their  rights, 
deemed  itself  responsible  for  their  sufferings,  and  ex- 
tended its  helping  hand.  In  1832,  the  Lord-lieu- 
tenant was  empowered  to  advance  60,000Z.  to  the 
clergy  who  had  been  unable  to  collect  the  tithes  of 
the  previous  year  '^  and  the  government  rashly 
undertook  to  levy  the  arrears  of  that  year,  in  repay- 
ment of  the  advance.  Their  attempt  was  vain  and 
hopeless.  They  went  forth,  with  an  array  of  tithe- 
proctors,  police,  and  military:  but  the  people  re- 
sisted. Desperate  conflicts  ensued :  many  lives 
were  lost :  the  executive  became  as  hateful  as  the 
clergy:  but  the  arrears  were  not  collected.  Of 
lOOjOOOL,  no  more  than  12,000^.  were  recovered,  at 
the  cost  of  tumults  and  bloodshed.^  The  people 
were  in  revolt  against  the  law,  and  triumphed.  The 
government,  confessing  their  failure,  abandoned 
their  fruitless  efforts;  and  in  1833,  obtained  from 
Parliament  the  advance  of  a  million,  to  maintain 
the  destitute  clergy,  and  cover  the  arrears  of  tithes, 
for  that  and  the  two  previous  years.     Indemnity 

'  Eeports  of  Comttiittees  in  Lords  and  Commons,  1832.    Ann. 
Eeg.,  1831,  p.  324;  1832,  p.  281. 
2  Act,  2  &  3  WiU.  IV.  c.  41. 
•  Speech  of  Mr.  Littleton ;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xx.  342. 


C/mrck  ill  Ireland.  259 

for  tliis  advance,  however,  was  sought  in  the  form 
of  a  land  tax,  which,  it  needed  little  foresight  to 
conjecture,  would  meet  with  the  same  resistance  as 
tithes.^  These  were  temporary  expedients,  to  meet 
the  immediate  exigencies  of  the  Irish  clergy ;  and 
hitherto  the  only  general  measure  which  the 
legislature  had  sanctioned,  was  one  for  making  the 
voluntary  tithe  compositions  compulsory  and  per- 
manent. ^ 

Meanwhile,  the  difBculties  of  the  tithe  question 
were  brine^ins^  into  bold  relief  the  anoma-  insh 

°      °  church 

lous  condition  of  the  Irish  Church.  Eesist-  reform, 
ance  to  the  payment  of  tithes  was  accompanied  by 
fierce  vituperation  of  the  clergy,  and  denunciations 
of  a  large  Protestant  establishment,  in  the  midst  of 
a  Catholic  people.  The  Catholic  priests  and  agita- 
tors would  have  trampled  upon  the  church  as  an 
usm-per  :  the  Protestants  and  Orangemen  were  pre- 
pared to  defend  her  rights  with  the  sword.  Earl 
G-rey's  government,  leaning  to  neither  extreme, 
recognised  the  necessity  of  extensive  reforms  and 
reductions  in  the  establishment.  Notwithstanding 
the  spoliations  of  Henry  VIII.  and  Elizabeth,  its 
endowments  were  on  the  ambitious  scale  of  a  na- 
tional church.  With  fewer  members  than  a  mode- 
rate diocese  in  England,  it  was  governed  by  no  less 
than  four  archbishops  and  eighteen  bishops.  Other 
dignitaries  enjoyed  its  temporalities  in  the  same 
proportion ;  and  many  sinecm-e  benefices  were  even 
without  Protestant  flocks. 

'  3  &  4  Will.  IV.  c.  100 ;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xx.  350. 
2  2&3  Wm.  IV.  c.  119. 

s  2 


2  6o  C/mrck  in  Ireland. 

Siicli  an  establishment  could  not  be  defended  ; 
Church        and  in  1833,  ministers  introduced  an  ex- 

Tempo- 

raiities         teusive  measuro  of  reform.     It  suppressed, 

(Ireland)  ^^  ' 

BUI,  1S33.  after  the  interests  of  existing  incumbents, 
two  archbishoprics,  and  eight  separate  sees;  and 
reduced  the  incomes  of  some  of  the  remaining 
bishops.  All  sinecure  stalls  in  cathedrals  were  abo- 
lished, or  associated  with  effective  duties.  Livings, 
in  which  no  duties  had  been  performed  for  three 
years,  were  not  to  be  filled  up.  First  fruits  were 
abolished.  Church  cess, — an  unpopular  impost, 
similar  to  church  rates  in  England, — levied  upon 
Catholics,  but  managed  by  Protestant  vestries, — 
was  discontinued ;  and  the  repair  of  churches  pro- 
vided .  for  out  of  a  graduated  tax  upon  the  clergy. 
Provision  was  made  for  the  improvement  of  church 
lands ;  for  the  augmentation  of  small  livings,  and 
for  the  building  of  churches  and  glebe  houses, 
under  the  superintendence  of  a  commission,  by 
whom  the  sm-plus  revenues  of  the  chui-ch  were  to 
be  administered.^ 

So  bold  were  these  reforms,  that  even  Mr.  O'Con- 
nell  at  first  expressed  his  satisfaction:  yet  while 
they  discontinued  the  most  prominent  abuses  of  the 
establishment,  they  increased  its  general  efiiciency. 
In  the  opinion  of  some  extreme  Tories,  indeed,  the 
measure  was  a  violation  of  the  coronation  oath, 
and  the  stipulations  of  the  Union  with  Ireland :  it 
was  an  act  of  spoliation :  its  principles  were  revo- 
lutionary.    But  by  men  of  more  moderate  views, 

•  Lord  Althorp's  Speech,  Feb.  ]2tb,  1833;  H.ans.  Deb.,  Srd  Scr., 
xv.  oGl. 


C/mrck  in  Ireland.  261 

its    justice    and    necessity    were   generally   recog- 
nised.^ 

One  principle,  however,  involved  in  the  scheme 
became  the  ground  of  painful  controversy ;  Principle 
and  long  interfered  with  the  progress  of  priation. 
other  measures  conceived  in  the  interests  of  the 
church.  A  considerable  sum  was  expected  to  be 
derived  from  the  grant  of  perpetual  leases  of  church 
lands ;  and  the  question  was  naturally  raised,  how 
was  it  to  be  disposed  of  ?  Admitting  the  first  claims 
of  the  church, — ^what  was  to  become  of  any  surplus, 
after  satisfying  the  needs  of  the  establishment? 
On  one  side,  it  was  maintained  that  the  property  of 
the  church  was  inalienable ;  and  that  nothing  but 
its  redistribution,  for  ecclesiastical  purposes,  could 
be  suffered.  On  the  other,  it  was  contended  that 
the  church  had  no  claim  to  the  increased  value 
given  to  her  lands  by  an  Act  of  Parliament ;  and 
that,  in  any  case,  the  legislature  was  free  to  dispose 
of  church  revenues,  for  the  public  benefit.  The 
bill  provided  that  the  monies  accruing  from  the 
grant  of  these  perpetuities  should  be  applied,  in 
the  first  instance,  in  redemption  of  charges  upon 
parishes,  for  building  churches  ;  and  any  surplus,  tc> 
such  purposes  as  Parliament  might  hereafter  direct.- 
Ministers,  fearing  that  the  recognition  of  this  prin- 
ciple of  appropriation,  even  in  so  vague  a  form,  would 
endanger  their  measure  in  the  House  of  june2ist, 
Lords,  abandoned  it  in  committee, — ^to  the  ^^^^• 
disgust  of  Mr.  O'Connell  and  his  followers,  and  of 

^  Debate  on  second  reading,  May  6th ;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xvii. 
966.  ■'  Clause  147. 


262  Chtcrch  in  Ireland. 

many  members  of  the  liberal  party.  Mr.  O'Connell 
asked  what  benefit  the  Irish  people  could  now  hope 
to  derive  from  the  measure,  beyond  the  remission 
of  the  church  cess  ?  The  church  establishment 
would  indeed  be  reduced ;  but  tne  people  would 
not  save  a  single  shilling  by  the  reduction.^  In 
truth,  however,  the  clause  had  not  expressly  de- 
clared that  the  revenues  of  the  church  were  appli- 
cable to  state  purposes.  Its  retention  would  not 
have  affirmed  the  principle :  its  omission  did  not 
surrender  any  rights  which  the  legislature  might, 
hereafter,  think  fit  to  exercise.  Whenever  the 
surplus  should  actually  arise,  Parliament  might 
determine  its  appropriation.  Yet  both  parties 
otherwise  interpreted  its  significance ;  and  it  be- 
came the  main  question  at  issue  between  the  friends 
and  opponents  of  the  church,  who  each  foresaw,  in 
the  recognition  of  an  abstract  principle,  the  ultimate 
alienation  of  the  revenues  of  the  Irish  establish- 
ment. For  the  present,  a  concession  being  made  to 
the  fears  of  the  church  party,  the  bill  was  agreed 
to  by  both  Houses.^  But  the  conflict  of  parties, 
upon  the  controverted  principle,  was  by  no  means 
averted. 

In  the  next  session,  Mr.  Ward,  in  a  speech  of 
Church  in  singular  ability,  called  upon  the  House  of 
M?!wl^d's  Commons  to  affirm  a  resolution  that  the 
Maymh,  church  establishment  in  Ireland  exceeded 
^^^'  the  spiritual  wants  of  the  Protestant  popu- 

lation ;  and  that  it  being  the  right  of  the  state  to 

'  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xviii.  1073;  Ann.  Eeg.,  1833,  p.  104. 
«  Church  Temporalities  (Ireland)  Act,  3  &  4  Will.  IV.  c.  37. 


Church  in  Ireland.  263 

regulate  the  distribution  of  church  property,  the 
temporal  possessions  of  the  church  in  Ireland  ought 
to  be  reduced.*  This  resolution  not  only  asserted 
the  principle  of  appropriation:  but  disturbed  the 
recent  settlement  of  the  ecclesiastical  establishment 
in  Ireland.  It  was  fraught  with  political  difficulties. 
The  cabinet  had  already  been  divided  upon  the 
principles  involved  in  this  motion ;  and  the  discus- 
sion was  interrupted  for  some  days  by  the  resigna- 
tion of  Mr.  Stanley,  Sir  James  Grraham,  the  Duke 
of  Eichmond,  and  the  Earl  of  Eipon.  The  embar- 
rassment of  ministers  was  increased  by  a  personal 
declaration  of  the  King  against  innovations  in  the 
church,  in  reply  to  an  address  of  the  Irish  bishops 
and  clergy.2  The  motion,  however,  was  gnperseded 
successfully  met  by  the  appointment  of  a  S'entS^a*^ 
commission  to  inquire  into  the  revenues  jXr2?dr* 
and  duties  of  the  church,  and  the  general  ^^^* 
state  of  religious  instruction  in  Ireland.  Hitherto 
there  had  been  no  certain  information  either  as  to 
the  revenues  of  the  church,  or  the  numbers  of  dif- 
ferent religious  communions  in  the  country;  and 
ministers  argued  that,  until  these  facts  had  been  as- 
certained, it  could  not  with  propriety  be  affirmed 
that  the  establishment  was  excessive.  At  the  same 
time,  the  appointment  of  the  commission  implied 
that  Parliament  would  be  prepared  to  deal  with  any 
surplus  which  might  be  proved  to  exist,  after  pro- 
viding for  the  wants  of  the  Protestant  population. 

1  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxiii.  1368. 

2  May  28th,  1834 ;  Ann.  Eeg.,  1834,  43. 


264  Church  in  Ireland. 

On  these  grounds  the  previous  question  was  moved, 
and  carried  by  a  large  majority.^ 

A  few  days  afterwards,  the  propriety  of  issuing 
Lords'  this  commission,  and  the  rights  of  the  state 

debate  on  _         ,.        .i      , . 

appropri-      ovcr  the  QistriDution  of  church  property, 

ation.June  ■"■       ^        "^ 

Gth,  1834.  were  warmly  debated  in  the  House  of  Lords. 
While  one  party  foresaw  spoliation  as  the  necessary 
result  of  the  proposed  inquiry,  and  the  other  dis- 
claimed any  intentions  hostile  to  the  church,  it  was 
agreed  on  all  sides  that  such  an  inquiry  assumed  a 
discretionary  power  in  the  state,  over  the  appropria- 
tion of  church  property.^  Earl  Grrey  boldly  avowed, 
that  if  it  should  appear  that  there  was  a  consider- 
able excess  of  revenue,  beyond  what  was  required 
for  the  efficiency  of  the  church  and  the  propagation 
of  divine  truth,  '  the  state  would  have  a  right  to 
deal  with  it  with  a  view  to  the  exigencies  of  the 
state  and  the  general  interests  of  the  country.'  ^ 

Meanwhile,  the  difficulties  of  the  question  of  Irish 
Irish  tithes  ^i^^^s  Were  pressiug.  Ministers  had  intro- 
wSappro-  duced  a  bill,  early  in  the  session,  for  con- 
priatiou.  verting  tithes  into  a  land  tax,  payable  to 
the  government  by  the  landlords,  and  subject  to  re- 
demption. When  redeemed,  the  proceeds  were  to 
be  invested  in  land  for  the  benefit  of  the  church.'* 
The  merits  of  this  measure  were  repeatedly  discussed, 
and  the  scheme  itself  materially  modified  in  its  pro- 


*  For  the  motion,  120 ;  for  the  previous  question,  396. — Hans. 
Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxiv.  10. 

2  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxiv.  243. 

3  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxiv.  254. 

*  Mr.  Dttleton's  Explanation,  Feb.  20th,  1834.— Hans.  Deb.,  3rd 
Ser.,  xxi.  572. 


Church  in  Ireland.  265 

gress :  but  the  question  of  appropriation  bore  a 
foremost  place  in  the  discussions.  Mr.  O'Connell 
viewed  with  alarm  a  plan  securing  to  the  church  a 
perpetual  vested  interest  in  tithes,  which  could  no 
longer  be  collected ;  and  threatened  the  landlords 
with  a  resistance  to  rent,  when  it  embraced  a  covert 
charge  for  the  maintenance  of  the  Protestant  church. 
Having  opposed  the  measure  itself,  on  its  j^^g  osrd, 
own  merits,  he  endeavoured  to  pledge  the  ^^^*' 
House  to  a  resolution,  that  any  surplus  of  the  funds 
to  be  raised  in  lieu  of  tithes,  after  providing  for 
vested  interests  and  the  spiritual  wants  of  the  church, 
should  be  appropriated  to  objects  of  public  utility.* 
Disclaiming  any  desire  to  appropriate  these  funds  for 
Catholic  or  other  religious  uses,  he  proposed  that 
they  should  be  applied  to  purposes  of  charity  and 
education.  On  the  part  of  ministers.  Lord  Althorp 
and  Lord  John  Eussell  again  upheld  the  right  of 
the  state  to  review  the  distribution  of  church  pro- 
perty, and  apply  any  surplus  according  to  its  dis- 
cretion. Nor  did  they  withhold  their  opinion,  that 
the  proper  appropriation  would  be  to  kindred  pur- 
poses, connected  with  the  moral  and  religious  in- 
struction of  the  people.  But  they  successfully  re- 
sisted the  motion  as  an  abstract  proposition,  prema- 
turely offered.^  Soon  afterwards.  Lord  Grrey's 
administration  was  suddenly  dissolved :  but  the  Tithe 
Bill  was  continued  by  Lord  Melbourne.  Many 
amendments,  however,  were  made, — including  one 

*  Amendment  on  going  into  committee. — Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser., 
xxiv.  734. 

-  It  was  negatived  by  a  majority  of  261.  Ayes,  99 ;  Noes,  360. — 
Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxiv.  805. 


2  6  6  Chtcrch  in  Ireland. 

forced  upon  ministers  by  Mr.  O'Connell,  by  which 
the  tithe-payer  was  immediately  relieved  to  the 
extent  of  forty  per  cent.  After  all  these  changes, 
the  bill  was  rejected,  on  the  second  reading,  by  the 
House  of  Lords.  ^  Again  the  clergy  were  left  to 
collect  their  tithes,  under  increased  difficulties  and 
discouragement. 

In^the  next  session.  Sir  Eobert  Peel  had  succeeded 
Sir  Robert  ^^  ^^®  ombarrassmeuts  of  Irish  tithes  and 
^S  fo?^*"  ^^  appropriation  question.  As  to  the  first, 
i?S™?S,  ^^  offered  a  practical  measure  for  the  com- 
^'^^'''  mutation  of  tithes  into  a  rent-charge  upon 

the  land,  with  a  deduction  of  twenty-five  per  cent. 
Provision  was  also  made  for  its  redemption,  and  the 
investment  of  the  value  in  land,  for  the  benefit  of 
the  church.  He  further  proposed  to  make  up  the 
arrears  of  tithes  in  1834,  out  of  the  million  already 
advanced  to  the  clergy.*  But  the  commutation  of 
tithes  was  not  yet  destined  to  be  treated  as  a  practical 
measure.  It  had  been  associated,  in  the  late  session, 
with  the  controverted  principle  of  appropriation, — 
which  now  became  the  rallying  point  of  parties.  It 
had  severed  from  Lord  Grrey  some  of  his  ablest  col- 
leagues, and  allied  them  with  the  opposite  party. 

Sir  Eobert  Peel,  on  accepting  office,  took  an  early 
opportunity  of  stating  that  he  would  not  give  his 
A^ppropria-     '  couseut  to  the  alieuatiou  of  church  pro- 

atpffir  P^^^^'  i^  ^^y  P^^^  ^^  ^^^  U^i^^d  Kingdom, 
oppSifn,'''  fi^oi^  strictly  ecclesiastical  purposes.'  On 
^^'^''"  the  other  hand,  in  the  first  discussion  upon 

»  Aug.  nth,  1834.     Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxv.  1143. 
2  Hans.  Deb.,  Ihid.,  xxvii.  13. 


Church  in  Ireland.  267 

Irish  tithes,  Lord  John  Eussell  expressed  his  doubts 
whether  any  advantage  would  result  from  the  aboli- 
tion of  tithes,  without  a  prior  decision  of  the  appro- 
priation question:  and  Mr.  O'Connell  proclaimed 
that  the  word  '  appropriation  would  exert  a  magical 
influence  in  Ireland.'  The  Whigs,  exasperated  by 
their  sudden  dismissal,^  were  burning  to  recover 
their  ground :  but  the  liberal  measures  of  the  new 
ministry  afforded  few  assailable  points.  Sir  Eobert 
Peel,  however,  had  taken  his  stand  upon  the  inviola- 
bility of  church  property ;  and  the  assertion  of  the 
contrary  doctrine  served  to  unite  the  various  sections 
of  the  opposition.  The  Whigs,  indeed,  were  em- 
barrassed by  the  fact  that  they  had  themselves  de- 
precated the  adoption  of  any  resolution,  until  the 
commission  had  made  its  report ;  and  this  report 
was  not  yet  forthcoming.  But  the  exigencies  of 
party  demanded  a  prompt  and  decisive  trial  of 
strength.  Lord  John  Eussell,  therefore,  pressed  for- 
ward with  resolutions  affirming  that  any  surplus 
revenues  of  the  church  of  Ireland,  not  required  for 
the  spiritual  care  of  its  members,  should  be  applied 
to  the  moral  and  religious  education  of  all  classes  of 
the  people ;  and  that  no  measure  on  the  subject  of 
tithes  would  be  satisfactory  which  did  not  embody 
that  principle.  These  resolutions  were  affirmed  by 
small  majorities  ;  ^  and  Sir  Eobert  Peel  was  driven 
from  power. 

'  Supra,  Vol.  I.  p.  145. 

'  On  April  2nd  a  committee  of  the  whole  House  was  obtained  by 
a  majority  of  33.— Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxvii.  362,  770,  &e.  On 
April  6th,  the  first  resolution  was  agreed  to  in  committee  by  a  ma- 
jority of  25  ;  and  on  the  7th,  the  second  resolution  was  affirmed  by 


268  Chicrch  in  Ireland. 

It  was  an  untoward  victory.  The  Whigs  had 
Approprifi-  pledged  themselves  to  connect  the  settle- 
Lord^Me^  Hient  of  tithcs  with  the  appropriation  of 
bourne.  ^^  surplus  rovcnues  of  the  church  of 
Ireland.  The  Conservatives  were  determined  to 
resist  that  principle ;  and  having  a  large  majority  in 
the  House  of  Lords,  their  resistance  was  not  to  be 
overcome. 

Meanwhile,  the  position  of  ministers  was  strength- 
ReTcnues  ^^^^  ^J  ^^  disclosure  of  the  true  state 
church  of  of  the  church.  Out  of  a  population  of 
Ireland.  7,943,940  persous,  there  were  852,064 
members  of  the  establishment;  6,427,712  Eoman 
Catholics,  642,356  Presbyterians ;  and  21,808  Pro- 
testant dissenters  of  other  denominations.  The 
state  church  embraced  little  more  than  a  tenth  of 
the  people.^  Her  revenues  amounted  to  865,525?. 
In  151  parishes  there  was  not  a  single  Protestant  : 
in  194  there  were  less  than  ten:  in  198  less  than 
twenty :  and  in  860  parishes  there  were  less  than 
fifty.2 

These  facts  were  dwelt  upon  in  support  of  appro- 
Appropria-  priatiou,  which  formed  part  of  every  bill 
don8d,i838.  for  the  Commutation  of  tithes.  But  the 
Lords  had  taken  their  stand  upon  a  principle  ;  and 
were  not  to  be  shaken.  Tithes  were  still  withheld 
from  the  clergy ;   and  the  feelings  of  the   people 

the  House  on  the  report  by  a  majority  of  27. — Comm.  Journ,,  xc. 
202,  208 ;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxvii.  790,  837,  878. 

'  1st  Eeport  of  Commissionei's  on  Public  Instruction,  Ireland 
(1835),  p.  7. 

'^  Lord  Morpeth's  Speech,  1835 ;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxviii. 
1339.  The  latter  number  comprises  the  parishes  preyiously  enume- 
rated. 


Church  ill  Ireland.  269 

were  embittered  by  continual  discussions  relating  to 
the  churcb  ;  while  bill  after  bill  was  sacrificed  to 
clauses  of  appropriation.  This  mischievous  contest 
between  the  two  Houses  was  brought  to  a  close  in 
1838,  by  the  abandonment  of  the  appropriation 
clause  by  ministers  themselves.  It  was,  indeed, 
bitter  and  humiliating :  but  it  was  unavoidable. 
The  settlement  of  tithes  could  no  longer  be  deferred  ; 
and  any  concession  from  the  Lords  was  hopeless. 
But  the  retirement  of  the  Whigs  from  a  position, 
which  they  had  chosen  as  their  own  battlefield,  was 
a  grievous  shock  to  their  influence  and  reputation. 
They  lost  the  confidence  of  many  of  their  own  party, 
— forfeited  public  esteem, — and  yielded  to  the  oppo- 
sition an  exultant  triumph  which  went  far  to  restore 
them  to  popular  favour,  and  ultimately  to  power.* 

But  if  ruin  awaited  the  Whigs,  salvation  was  at 
hand  for  the  church  of  Ireland.  Tithes  commute- 
were  at  length  commuted  into  a  perma-  tithes,  isss. 
nent  rent-charge  upon  the  land;  and  the  clergy 
amply  indemnified  for  a  sacrifice  of  one-fourth  the 
amount,  by  unaccustomed  security  and  the  peace- 
able enjoyment  of  their  rights.  They  were  further 
compensated  for  the  loss  of  arrears,  out  of  the  balance 
of  the  million,  advanced  by  Parliament  as  a  loan  in 
1833,  and  eventually  surrendered  as  a  free  gift.^ 
The  church  had  passed  through  a  period  of  trials 
and  danger ;  and  was  again  at  peace.  The  grosser 
abuses  of  her  establishment  were  gradually  corrected, 

*  See  especially  Debates,  May  Uth  and  July  2nd,  1S38.     Hans. 
Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xlii.  1203  ;  xliii.  1177. 

*  1  &  2  Vict.  c.  109. 


270  Church  in  I  Iceland. 

under  tlie  supervision  of  the  ecclesiastical  com- 
missioners :  but  its  diminislied  revenues  were  de- 
voted exclusively  to  the  promotion  of  its  spiritual 
eflB.ciency. 

While  the  state  protected  the  Protestant  church, 
National  it  had  uot  becu  unmindful  of  the  interests 
in  Ireland,  of  the  great  bodj  of  the  people,  who  de- 
rived no  benefit  from  her  ministrations.  In  1831 
a  national  system  of  education  was  established,  em- 
bracing the  children  of  persons  of  all  religious 
denominations.^  It  spread  and  flourished,  until,  in 
1860,  803,364  pupils  received  instruction, — of  whom 
663,145  were  Catholics,^ — at  an  annual  cost  to  the 
state  of  270,000^3 

In  1845,  Sir  Kobert  Peel  adventured  on  a  bold 
Maynooth  mcasurc  for  promoting  the  education  of 
1845.  '  Catholic  priests  in  Ireland.*  Prior  to 
1795,  the  laws  forbade  the  endowment  of  any  college 
or  seminary  for  the  education  of  Eoman  Catholics  in 
Ireland  ;  and  young  men  in  training  for  the  priest- 
hood were  obliged  to  resort  to  colleges  on  the  con- 
tinent, and  chiefly  to  France,  to  prepare  themselves 
for  holy  orders.  But  the  French  revolutionary  war 
having  nearly  closed  Europe  against  them,  the 
government  were  induced  to  found  the  Eoman 
Catholic  College  of  Maynooth.^     It  was  a  friendly 

»  On  Sept.  9th,  1831,  30,000?.  were  first  voted  for  this  purpose.— 
Hans.  Deb.,  3i*d  Ser.,  vi.  1249.  Commissioners  were  appointed  by 
tl'.o  Lord-lieutenant  to  administer  the  system  in  1832,  and  incorpo- 
rated by  letters  patent  in  1845. 

2  28th  Report  of  Commissioners,  1861,  No.  [3026],  pp.  10, 
11,  &c. 

»  The  sum  voted  in  1860  was  270,722?. 

*  April  3rd,  1845.     Hans.  Deb.,  Ixxix.  18. 

*  Irish  Act,  35  Geo.  III.  c.  21  ;  Cornwallis  Corr.,  iii.  366-375 ; 
Lord  Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt,  ii.  311. 


Chu7^ch  in  h^cland.  271 

concession  to  the  Catholics  ;  and  promised  well  for 
the  future  loyalty  of  the  priesthood.  The  college 
was  supported  by  annual  grants  of  the  Parliament  of 
Ireland,  which  were  continued  by  the  United  Parlia- 
ment, after  the  Union.  The  connection  of  the  state 
with  this  college  had  been  sanctioned  in  the  days  of 
Protestant  ascendency  in  Ireland  ;  and  was  continued 
without  objection  by  Greorge  III., — the  most  Protest- 
ant of  kings, — and  by  the  most  Protestant  of  his 
ministers,  at  a  time  when  prejudices  against  the 
Catholics  had  been  fomented  to  the  utmost.  But 
when  more  liberal  sentiments  prevailed  concerning 
the  civil  rights  of  the  Catholics,  a  considerable 
number  of  earnest  men,  both  in  the  church  and  in 
other  religious  bodies,  took  exceptions  to  the  endow- 
ment of  an  institution,  by  the  state,  for  teaching 
the  doctrines  of  the  church  of  Eome.  '  Let  us  ex- 
tend to  Catholics,'  they  said, '  the  amplest  toleration  : 
let  us  give  them  every  encouragement  to  found 
colleges  for  themselves :  but  let  not  a  Protestant 
state  promote  errors  and  superstitions :  ask  not  a 
Protestant  people  to  contribute  to  an  object  abhor- 
rent to  their  feelings  and  consciences.'  On  these 
grounds  the  annual  grant  had  been  for  some  time 
opposed,  while  the  college, — the  unfortunate  object 
of  discussion, — was  neglected  and  falling  into  decay. 
In  these  circumstances,  Sir  Eobert  Peel  proposed  to 
grant  30,000^  for  buildings  and  improvements, — to 
allow  the  trustees  of  the  college  to  hold  lands  to  the 
value  of  3,000Z.  a  year, — and  to  augment  the  endow- 
ment from  less  than  9,000^.  a  year  to  26,360^.  To 
give  permanence  to  this  endowment,  and  to  avoid 


272  Church  in  Ireland. 

irritating  discussions,  year  after  year,  it  was  charged 
upon  the  Consolidated  Fund.^ 

Having  successfully  defended  the  revenues  of  the 
Protestant  church,  he  now  met  the  claims  of  the 
Catholic  clergy  in  a  liberal  and  friendly  spirit.  The 
concession  infringed  no  principle  which  the  more 
niggardly  votes  of  former  years  had  not  equally  in- 
fringed :  but  it  was  designed  at  once  to  render  the 
college  worthy  of  the  patronage  of  the  state,  and  to 
conciliate  the  Catholic  body.  He  was  supported 
by  the  first  statesmen  of  all  parties,  and  by  large 
majorities  in  both  Houses :  but  the  virulence  with 
which  his  conciliatory  policy  was  assailed,  and  the 
doctrines  of  the  church  of  Eome  denounced,  de- 
prived a  beneficent  act  of  its  grace  and  courtesy. 

If  the  consciences  of  Protestants  were  outraged 
by  contributing,  however  little,  to  the  support  of 
the  Catholic  faith,  what  must  have  been  the  feelings 
of  Catholic  Ireland  towards  a  Protestant  church, 
maintained  for  the  use  of  a  tenth  of  the  people! 
It  would  have  been  well  to  avoid  so  painful  a  con- 
troversy: but  it  was  raised;  and  the  Act  of  1845, 
so  far  from  being  accepted  as  the  settlement  of  a 
vexed  question,  appeared  for  several  years  to  aggra- 
stateaid  ^'^^®  ^^  bittomess  of  the  strife.  But  the 
ShCTreii-  state,  superior  to  sectarian  animosities, 
^^°^'  calmly  acknowledged  the  claims  of  Catho- 

lic subjects  upon  its  justice  and  liberality.  Govern- 
ing a  vast  empire,  and  ruling  over  men  of  different 
races  and  religions,  it  had  already  aided  the  propa- 

»  April  3rd,  1845.     Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  Ixxix.  18>     See  also 
Supplementary  Chapter. 


Religious  Liberty.  273 

gation  of  doctrines  which  it  disowned.  In  Ireland 
itself,  the  state  has  provided  for  the  maintenance  of 
Eoman  Catholic  chaplains  in  prisons  and  workhouses. 
A  different  policy  would  have  deprived  the  inmates 
of  those  establishments,  of  all  the  offices  and  conso- 
lations of  religion.  It  has  provided  for  the  re- 
ligious instruction  of  Catholic  soldiers ;  and  since 
the  reign  of  William  III.  the  Presbyterians  of 
Ireland  received  aid  from  the  state,  known  as  the 
Eegium  Donimi.  In  Canada,  Malta,  Gribraltar,  the 
Mauritius  and  other  possessions  of  the  crown,  the 
state  has  assisted  Catholic  worship.  Its  policy  has 
been  imperial  and  secular, — not  religious. 

In  the  same  enlarged  spirit  of  equity.  Sir  Eobert 
Peel  secured,  in  1845,  the  foundation  of  q^^^^,^ 
three  new  colleges  in  Ireland,  for  the  im-  iSid' 
provement  of  academical  education,  with-  ■^^^* 
out  religious  distinctions.  These  liberal  endowments 
were  mainly  designed  for  Catholics,  as  composing  the 
great  body  of  the  people  :  but  they  who  had  readily 
availed  themselves  of  the  benefits  of  national  educa- 
tion,— founded  on  the  principle  of  a  combined 
literary  and  separate  religious  instruction, — repu- 
diated these  new  institutions.  Being  for  the  use  of 
all  religious  denominations,  the  peculiar  tenets  of  no 
particular  sect  could  be  allowed  to  form  part  of  the 
ordinary  course  of  instruction:  but  lecture-rooms 
were  assigned  for  the  purpose  of  religious  teaching, 
according  to  the  creed  of  every  student.^  The 
Catholics,  however,  withheld  their  confidence  from  a 
system  in  which  their  own  faith  was  not  recognised 

^  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  Ixxx.  345  ;  8  &  9  Vict.  c.  66. 
VOL.  III.  T 


2  74  Religious  Liberty, 

as  predominant ;  and  denounced  the  new  colleges  as 
'godless.'  The  Eoman  Catholic  Synod  of  Thurles 
prohibited  the  clergy  of  their  communion  from 
being  concerned  in  the  administration  of  these 
establishments ;  ^  and  their  decrees  were  sanctioned 
by  a  rescript  of  the  Pope.^  The  colleges  were 
everywhere  discountenanced  as  seminaries  for  the 
sons  of  Catholic  parents.  The  liberal  designs  of 
Parliament  were  so  far  thwarted ;  yet,  even  under 
these  discouragements,  the  colleges  enjoyed  a  fair 
measure  of  success.  A  steady  increase  of  pupils  of 
all  denominations  has  been  maintained  ;  ^  the  educa- 
tion is  excellent;  and  the  best  friends  of  Ireland 
are  still  hopeful  that  a  people  of  rare  aptitude  for 
learning  will  not  be  induced,  by  religious  jealousies, 
to  repudiate  the  means  of  intellectual  cultivation, 
which  the  state  has  invited  them  to  accept.^ 

»  August,  1850.  2  ]y;ay  23rd,  1851. 

'  In  1858  the  commissioners  of  inquiry  reported : — 'The  colleges 
cannot  be  regarded  otherwise  than  as  successful."^ — Report  of  Commis- 
sioners, 1858,  No.  [2413.]  In  1860,  the  entrances  had  increased 
from  168  to  309  ;  and  the  numbers  attending  lectures,  from  454  to 
752.  Of  the  latter  number,  207  were  members  of  the  Established 
Church;  204,  Eoman  Catholics;  247,  Presbyterians;  and  94  of 
other  persuasions. — Report  of  President  for  1860-61,  1862,  No. 
[2999]. 

*  As  to  recent  legislation  concerning  religious  establishments  in 
Ireland,  see  Supplementary  Chapter. 


Corporations  in  England,  275 


CHAPTER   XV. 

rOCAI.     GOVEENMENT     THE     BASIS    OF    CONSTmJTIONAI.    FEEEDOM : 

vestries: MUNICIPAI,     COEPOBATIONS     IN    ENGLAND,     SCOTLAND, 

AND     IRELAND  : — ^LOCAL     IMPROVEMENT   AND   POLICE   ACTS  : — LOCAL 
BOARDS  CONSTITUTED  UNDER   GENERAL   ACTS  : — COURTS  OF  QUARTER 

SESSIONS. 

That  Englishmen  have- been  qualified  for  the  enjoy- 
ment of  political  freedom,  is  mainly  due  to  j^ocaigo- 
those  ancient  local  institutions  by  which  th™S*of 
they  have  been  trained  to  self-government.  tuSon'ai 
The  affairs  of  the  people  have  been  admin-  ^^°^°°^' 
istered,  not  in  Parliament  only,  but  in  the  vestry, 
the  town-council,  the  board-meeting,  and  the  Court 
of  Quarter   Sessions.      England   alone   among  the 
nations  of  the  earth  has  maintained  for  centuries  a 
constitutional   polity;    and   her   liberties   may    be 
ascribed,  above  all  things,  to  her  free  local  institu- 
tions.    Since  the  days  of  their  Saxon  ancestors,*  her 
sons  have  learned,  at  their  own  gates,  the  duties  and 
responsibilities   of   citizens.      Associating,   for   the 
common  good,  they  have  become  exercised  in  public 
affairs.     Thousands  of  small  communities  have  en- 
joyed  the   privileges   of    self-government:    taxing 
themselves,  through  their  representatives,  for  local 
objects:  meeting  for  discussion  and  business;  and 
animated  by  local  rivalries  and   ambitions.      The 

*  Piilgrare's  English  Commonwealth,  i.  628;  Allen's  Prerog.,  128, 
T  2 


276  L  oca  I  Government. 

history  of  local  government  affords  a  striking  paral- 
lel to  the  general  political  history  of  the  country. 
While  the  aristocracy  was  encroaching  upon  popular 
power  in  the  government  of  the  state,  it  was  making 
advances,  no  less  sure,  in  local  institutions.  The 
few  were  gradually  appropriating  the  franchises 
which  were  the  birthright  of  the  many  ;  and  again, 
as  political  liberties  were  enlarged,  the  rights  of 
self-government  were  recovered. 

Every  parish  is  the  image  and  reflection  of  the 
The  parish,  stato.  The  land,  the  church,  and  the  com- 
monalty share  in  its  government :  the  aristocratic 
and  democratic  elements  are  combined  in  its  society. 
The  vestry.  The  commou  law,^in  its  grand  simplicity, 
— recognised  the  right  of  all  the  rated  parishioners 
to  assemble  in  vestry,  and  administer  parochial 
affairs.^  But  in  many  parishes  this  popular  prin- 
ciple gradually  fell  into  disuse ;  and  a  few  inhabi- 
The  select  ^auts,  —  self-clectcd  and  irresponsible, — 
vestry.  claimed  the  right  of  imposing  taxes,  ad- 
ministering the  parochial  funds,  and  exercising  all 
local  authority.  This  usurpation,  long  acquiesced 
in,  grew  into  a  custom,  which  the  courts  recognised 
as  a  legal  exception  from  the  common  law.  The 
people  had  forfeited  their  rights ;  and  select  vestries 
ruled  in  their  behalf.  So  absolute  was  their  power, 
that  they  could  assemble  without  notice,  and  bind 
all  the  inhabitants  of  the  parish  by  their  vote.^ 

This  single  abuse  was  corrected  by  Mr.  Sturges 

'  Shaw's  Par.  Law,  c.  17  ;  Steer's  Par.  Law,  253  ;  Toulmin  Smith's 
Parish,  2nd  edn.,  15-23,  46-52,  288-330. 

''■  Gibson'b  Codex,  219;  Burn's  Eccl.  Law,  iv.  10,  &c. ;  Steer, 
251. 


Corporations  in  England.  277 

Bourne's  Act  in  1818 :  ^  but  this  same  act,  while  it 
left  select  vestries  otherwise  un-reformed,  Mr.  sturges 
made  a  further  inroad  upon  the  popular  Act,i8i8. 
constitution  of  open  vestries.  Hitherto  every  person 
entitled  to  attend,  had  enjoyed  an  equal  right  of 
voting ;  but  this  act  multiplied  the  votes  of  vestry- 
men according  to  the  value  of  their  rated  property : 
one  man  could  give  six  votes  :  others  no  more  than 
one. 

An  important  breach,  however,  was  made  in  the 
exclusive  system  of  local  government,  by  sir  John  ^ 
Sir  John  Hobhouse's  Vestry  Act,  passed  Act,i83i. 
during  the  agitation  for  parliamentary  reform.^ 
The  majority  of  ratepayers,  in  any  parish,  within  a 
city  or  town,  or  any  other  parish  comprising  800 
householders  rated  to  the  poor,  were  empowered 
to  adopt  this  act.  Under  its  provisions,  vestries 
were  elected  by  every  rated  parishioner :  the  votes 
of  the  electors  were  taken  by  ballot:  every  ten- 
pound  householder,  except  in  certain  cases,^  was 
eligible  as  a  vestiyman:  and  no  member  of  the 
vestry  was  entitled  to  more  than  a  single  vote. 
This  measure,  however  democratic  in  principle,  did 
little  more  than  revert  to  the  policy  of  the  common 
law.     It  was  adopted  in  some  populous  parishes  in 

»  58  Geo.  III.  c.  69,  amended  by  59  Geo.  III.  c.  85,  7  WHl.  IV. 
and  1  Vict.  c.  35  ;  Eeport  on  Poor  Laws,  1818. — Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser., 
xxxviii.  573. 

2  1  &  2  WiU.  IV.  c.  60 ;  Oct.  20th,  1831  :  Toulmin  Smith's 
Parish,  240. 

'  In  the  metropolis,  or  in  any  parish  having  more  than  3,000  in- 
habitants, a  40^.  qualification  was  required.  In  the  metropolis,  how- 
ever, the  act  was  superseded  by  the  Metropolis  Local  Management 
Act,  1855.— iw/ra,  297. 


278  Local  Government. 

the  metropolis  and   elsewhere:   but   otherwise   has 
had  a  limited  operation.^ 

The  history  of  municipal  corporations  affords 
Munici  ai  another  example  of  encroachments  upon 
V^^'  popular  rights.  The  government  of  towns, 
England.  -Qnder  the  Saxons,  was  no  less  popular  than 
the  other  local  institutions  of  that  race  ;  ^  and  the 
constitution  of  corporations,  at  a  later  period,  was 
founded  upon  the  same  principles.  All  the  settled 
inhabitants  and  traders  of  corporate  towns,  who  con- 
tributed to  the  local  taxes,  had  a  voice  in  the  man- 
agement of  their  own  municipal  affairs.^  The  com- 
munity, enjoying  corporate  rights  and  privileges, 
was  continually  enlarged  by  the  admission  of  men 
connected  with  the  town  by  birth,  marriage,  appren- 
ticeship or  servitude,  and  of  others,  not  so  connected, 
by  gift  or  purchase.  For  some  centuries  after  the 
conquest,  the  burgesses  assembled  in  person,  for  the 
transaction  of  business.  They  elected  a  mayor,  or 
other  chief  magistrate :  but  no  governing  body,  or 
town-council,  to  whom  their  authority  was  delegated. 
The  burgesses  only  were  known  to  the  law.  But  as 
towns  and  trade  increased,  the  more  convenient 
practice  of  representation  was  introduced  for  muni- 
cipal as  well  as  for  parliamentary  goYernment.  The 
most   wealthy   and    influential    inhabitants    being 

*  In  1842,  nine  parishes  only  had  adopted  it. — ^Parl.  Paper,  1842, 
No.  564. 

-  Palgrave's  English  Commonwealth,  i.  629  ;  Merewether  and 
Stephens'  Hist,  of  Boroughs,  Introd.  viii.  ;  Kemble's  Hist.,  ii.  262; 
Lappenberg's  England,  App. ;  Hallam's  Middle  Ages,  ii.  153. 

^  Eeport  of  Commissioners  on  Municipal  Corporations,  1835,  p. 
16  ;  Merewether  and  Stephens'  Hist,  Introd.  v.  1,10,  &c. ;  Hallam's 
Middle  Ages,  ii.  165. 


Corporations  in  England.  279 

chosen,  gradually  encroached  upon  the  privileges  of 
the  inferior  townsmen,  assumed  all  municipal  autho- 
rity, and  substituted  self-election  for  the  suffrages 
of  burgesses  and  freemen.  This  encroachment  upon 
popular  rights  was  not  submitted  to  without  many 
struggles :  but  at  the  close  of  the  fifteenth  century, 
it  had  been  successfully  accomplished  in  a  large  pro- 
portion of  the  corporations  of  England. 

Until  the  reign  of  Henry  VII.,  these  encroach- 
ments had  been  local  and  spontaneous.  The  charters 

people  had  submitted  to  them :  but  the  law  Henry  yn. 
t    J^  p  1  *°  *^®  Revo- 

had  not  enforced  them.     From  this  time,  luuon. 

however,  popular  rights  were  set  aside  in  a  new 
form.  The  crown  began  to  grant  charters  to 
boroughs, — generally  conferring  or  reviving  the  pri- 
vilege of  returning  members  to  Parliament ;  and 
most  of  these  charters  vested  all  the  powers  of 
municipal  government  in  the  mayor  and  town  coun- 
cil,— nominated  in  the  first  instance  by  the  crown 
itself,  and  afterwards  self-elected.  Nor  did  the  con- 
tempt of  the  Tudors  for  popular  rights  stop  here. 
By  many  of  their  charters,  the  same  governing  body 
was  intrusted  with  the  exclusive  right  of  returning 
members  to  Parliament.  For  national  as  well  as 
local  government,  the  burgesses  were  put  beyond 
the  pale  of  the  constitution.  And  in  order  to  bring 
municipalities  under  the  direct  influence  of  the 
crown  and  the  nobility,  the  office  of  high  steward 
was  often  created :  when  the  nobleman  holding  that 
ofi&ce  became  the  patron  of  the  borough,  and  re- 
turned its  members  to  Parliament.  The  power  of 
the  crown  and  aristocracy  was  increased,  at  the  ex- 


28o  Local  Government. 

pense  of  the  liberties  of  the  people.  The  same 
policy  was  pursued  by  the  Stuarts  ;  and  the  two  last 
of  that  race  violated  the  liberties  of  the  few  corpo- 
rations which  still  retained  a  popular  constitution, 
after  the  encroachments  of  centuries.^ 

After  the  Eevolution,  corporations  were  free  from 
Corporations  the  iutrusiou  of  prerogative  :  but  the  policy 

from  the  „  .    .       ,  ^         ,  ,.     ,  , 

Eevolution    of  municipal  freedom  was  as  little  respected 

to  George  .        ^  . 

ni.  as   m  former  times.      A  corporation  had 

come  to  be  regarded  as  a  close  governing  body,  with 
peculiar  privileges.  The  old  model  was  followed ; 
and  the  charters  of  Greorge  III.  favoured  the  muni- 
cipal rights  of  burgesses  no  more  than  the  charters 
of  Elizabeth  or  James  I.^  Even  where  they  did  not 
expressly  limit  the  local  authority  to  a  small  body 
of  persons, — custom  and  usurpation  restricted  it 
either  to  the  town  council,  or  to  that  body  and  its 
own  nominees,  the  freemen.  And  while  this  close 
form  of  municipal  government  was  maintained, 
towns  were  growing  in  wealth  and  population,  whose 
inhabitants  had  no  voice  in  the  management  of  their 
own  affairs  Two  millions  of  people  were  denied 
the  constitutional  privilege  of  self-government. 

Self-elected  and  irresponsible  corporations  were 
Abuses  of  suffered  to  enjoy  a  long  dominion.  Com- 
rations.  poscd  of  local,  and  often  hereditary  cliques 
and  family  connexions,  they  were  absolute  masters 
over  their  own  townsmen.  Grenerally  of  one  politi- 
cal party,  they  excluded  men  of  different  opinions, 

'  Case  of  Quo  Warranto,  1683 ;  St.  Tr.,  viii.  1039 ;  Hume's  Hist., 
vi.  201 ;  remodelling  the  corporations,  1687;  Hallam's  Const.  Hist., 
li.  238. 

-  Report  of  Commissioners,  p.  17. 


Corporations  in  England.  281 

— wliether  in  politics  or  religion, — and  used  all  the 
influence  of  their  office  for  maintaining  the  as- 
cendency of  their  own  party.  Elected  for  life,  it 
was  not  difficult  to  consolidate  their  interest ;  and 
they  acted  without  any  sense  of  responsibility.^ 
Their  proceedings  were  generally  secret :  nay, 
secrecy  was  sometimes  enjoined  by  an  oath.* 

Despite  their  narrow  constitution,  there  were 
some  corporations  which  performed  their  functions 
worthily.  Maintaining  a  mediaeval  dignity  and 
splendour,  their  rule  was  graced  by  public  virtue, 
courtesy  and  refinement.  Nobles  shared  their 
councils  and  festivities :  the  first  men  of  the  county 
were  associated  with  townsmen :  and  while  ruling 
without  responsibility,  they  retained  the  willing 
allegiance  of  the  people,  by  traditions  of  public  ser- 
vice, by  acts  of  munificence  and  charity,  and  by  the 
respect  due  to  their  eminent  station.  But  the 
greater  number  of  corporations  were  of  a  lower  type. 
Neglecting  their  proper  functions, — the  superin- 
tendence of  the  police,  the  management  of  the  gaols, 
the  paving  and  lighting  of  the  streets,  and  the  sup- 
ply of  water, — they  thought  only  of  the  personal 
interests  attached  to  office.  They  grasped  all 
patronage,  lay  and  ecclesiastical,  for  their  relatives, 
friends,  and  political  partisans  ;  and  wasted  the  cor- 
porate funds  in  greasy  feasts  and  vulgar  revelry.* 
Many  were  absolutely  insolvent.  Charities  were 
despoiled,  and  public  trusts  neglected  and  misap- 
plied :  jobbery  and  corruption  in  every  form  were 

*  Report  of  Commissioners,  p.  36.  '  Jhxd.^  36. 

»  Ibid.,  p.  46. 


282  Local  Government. 

fostered.^  Townsmen  viewed  with  distrust  the  pro- 
ceedings of  councils,  over  whom  they  had  no  con- 
trol,— whose  constitution  was  oligarchical,  —  and 
whose  political  sentiments  were  often  obnoxious  to 
the  majority.  In  some  towns  the  middle  classes 
found  themselves  ruled  by  a  close  council  alone  :  in 
others  by  the  council  and  a  rabble  of  freemen, — its 
creatures, — drawn  mainly  from  the  lower  classes, 
and  having  no  title  to  represent  the  general  inter- 
ests of  the  community.  Hence  important  munici- 
pal powers  were  often  intrusted,  under  Local  Acts, 
to  independent  commissioners,  in  whom  the  inhabi- 
tants had  confidence.^  Even  the  administration  of 
justice  was  tainted  by  suspicions  of  political  par- 
tiality.3  Borough  magistrates  were  at  once  incom- 
petent, and  exclusively  of  one  party ;  and  juries 
were  composed  of  freemen,  of  the  same  close  con- 
nexion. This  favoured  class  also  enjoyed  trading 
privileges,  which  provoked  jealousy  and  Tettered 
commerce.* 

But  the  worst  abuse  of  these  corrupt  bodies,  was 
Monopoly  that  which  too  long  secured  their  impunity. 
rights.  They  were  the  strongholds  of  Parlia- 
mentary interest  and  corruption.  The  electoral  pri- 
vileges which  they  had  usurped,  or  had  acquired  by 
charter,  were  convenient  instruments  in  the  hands 
of  both  the  political  parties,  who  were  contending 
for  power.  In  many  of  the  corporate  towns  the 
representation  was  as  much  at  the  disposal  of  par- 
ticular families,  as  that  of  nomination  boroughs  :  in 

'  Eep.  of  Commissioners,  31,  46,  47,  48.  ^  Ibid.,  43. 

»  Ihid.,  26-29,  39.  *  Jhid.,  40. 


Corporations  hi  England,  283 

others  it  was  purchased  by  opulent  partisans,  whom 
both  parties  welcomed  to  their  ranks.  In  others, 
again,  where  freemen  enjoyed  the  franchise,  it  was 
secured  by  bribery,  in  which  the  corporations  too 
often  became  the  most  active  agents, — not  scrupling 
even  to  apply  their  trust  funds  to  the  corruption  of 
electors.^  The  freemen  were  generally  needy  and 
corrupt,  and  inferior,  as  well  in  numbers  as  in  re- 
spectability, to  the  other  inhabitants :  ^  but  they 
often  had  an  exclusive  right  to  the  franchise ;  and 
whenever  a  general  election  was  anticipated,  large 
additions  were  made  to  their  numbers.^  The  free- 
dom of  a  city  was  valued  according  to  the  leng-th  of 
the  candidate's  purse.  Corporations  were  safe  so 
long  as  society  was  content  to  tolerate  the  notorious 
abuses  of  Parliamentary  representation.  The  muni- 
cipal and  Parliamentary  organisations  were  insepar- 
able :  both  were  the  instruments  by  which  the  crown, 
the  aristocracy,  and  political  parties  had  dispossessed 
the  people  of  their  constitutional  rights ;  and  they 
stood  and  fell  together. 

The  Eeform  Act  wrested  from  the  corporations 
their  exclusive  electoral  privileges,  and  re-  ^^  jiunid. 
stored  them  to  the  people.  This  tardy  act  Jl^^n^Bm""" 
of  retribution  was  followed  by  the  appoint-  ^®^* 
ment  of  a  comniission  of  inquiry,  which  roughly 
exposed  the  manifold  abuses  of  irresponsible  power, 
wherever  it  had  been  suffered  to  prevail.  And  in 
1835,  Parliament  was  called  upon  to  overthrow  these 
municipal  oligarchies.     The  measure  was  fitly  intro- 

'  Kep.  of  Comm.,  45.  2  n^^^  33^ 

^  Ibid.^  34,  35.     (See  table  of  freemen  created.) 


284  Local  Government. 

duced  by  Lord  John  Eussell,  who  had  been  foremost 
in  the  cause  of  Parliamentary  reform.^  It  proposed 
to  vest  the  municipal  franchise  in  rated  inhabitants 
who  had  paid  poor-rates  within  the  borough  for  three 
years.  By  them  the  governing  body,  consisting  of  a 
mayor  and  common  council,  were  to  be  elected.  The 
ancient  order  of  aldermen  was  to  be  no  longer  main- 
tained. The  pecuniary  rights  of  existing  freemen 
were  preserved  during  their  lives  :  but  their  muni- 
cipal franchise  was  superseded  ;  and  as  no  new  free- 
men were  to  be  created,  the  class  would  be  eventu- 
ally extinguished.  Exclusive  rights  of  trading  were 
to  be  discontinued.  To  the  councils,  constituted  so 
as  to  secure  public  confidence,  more  extended  powers 
were  intrusted,  for  the  police  and  local  government 
of  the  town,  and  the  administration  of  justice  ;  while 
provision  was  made  for  the  publicity  of  their  pro- 
ceedings, the  proper  administration  of  their  funds, 
and  the  publication  and  audit  of  their  accounts. 

Ko  effective  opposition  could  be  offered  to  the 
Amended  general  principles  of  this  measure.  The 
Lords.  propriety  of  restoring  the  rights  of  self- 

government  to  the  people,  and  sweeping  away  the 
corruptions  of  ages,  was  generally  admitted :  but 
strenuous  efforts  were  made  to  give  further  protec- 
tion to  existing  rights,  and  to  modify  the  popular 
character  of  the  measure.  These  efforts,  ineffectual 
in  the  Commons,  were  successful  in  the  Lords 
Counsel  was  heard,  and  witnesses  examined,  on  be- 
iialf  of  several  of  the  corporations :  but  the  main 
principles  of  the  bill  were  not  contested.     Important 

*  June  5th,  1835. — Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxviii.  541. 


Corporations  in  England,  285 

amendments,  however,  were  inserted.  The  pecuniary 
rights  and  parliamentary  franchise  of  freemen  re- 
ceived more  ample  protection.  With  a  view  to 
modify  the  democratic  constitution  of  the  councils, 
a  property  qualification  was  required  for  town  coun- 
cillors ;  and  aldermen  were  introduced  into  the 
council,  to  be  elected  for  life  ;  the  first  aldermen 
being  chosen  from  the  existing  body  of  aldermen.' 
Those  amendments  were  considered  by  ministers  and 
the  Commons,  in  a  spirit  of  concession  and  compro- 
mise. The  more  zealous  advocates  of  popular  rights 
urged  their  unconditional  rejection,  even  at  the 
sacrifice  of  the  bill :  but  more  temperate  councils 
prevailed,  and  the  amendments  were  accepted  with 
modifications.  A  qualification  for  councillors  was 
agreed  to,  but  in  a  less  invidious  form :  aldermen 
were  to  be  elected  for  six  years,  instead  of  for  life  ; 
and  the  exclusive  eligibility  of  existing  aldermen 
was  not  insisted  on.^  And  thus  was  passed  a  popular 
measure,  second  in  importance  to  the  Eeform  Act 
alone.^  The  municipal  bodies  which  it  created,  if 
less  popular  than  under  the  original  scheme,  were 
yet  founded  upon  a  wide  basis  of  representation, 
which  has  since  been  further  extended.''  Local  self- 
government  was  effectually  restored.  Elected  rulers 
have  since  generally  secured  the  confidence  of  their 
constituents :  municipal  office  has  become  an  object 
of  honourable  ambition  to  public-spirited  towns- 
men ;    and  local  administration, — if  not  free  from 

1  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxx.  426,  480,  /i79,  &c 

'-'  im.,  XXX.  1132,  1194,1335. 

3  5  &  6  Will.  IV.  c.  76. 

<  Municipal  Corporations  Act,  1859,  22  Vict.  c.  35. 


286  Local  Government. 

abuses,*  has  been  exercised  under  responsibility  and 
popular  control.  And  further,  the  enjoyment  of 
municipal  franchises  has  encouraged  and  kept  alive 
a  spirit  of  political  freedom,  in  the  inhabitants  of 
towns. 

One  ancient  institution  alone  was  omitted  from 
Corpora-  this  general  measure  of  reform, — the  cor- 
London.  poratiou  of  the  City  of  London.  It  was  a 
municipal  principality, — of  great  antiquity,  of  wide 
jm'isdiction,  of  ample  property  and  revenues, — and 
of  composite  organisation.  Distinguished  for  its 
public  spirit,  its  independent  influence  had  often 
been  the  bulwark  of  popular  rights.  Its  magistrates 
had  braved  the  resentment  of  kings  and  Parlia- 
ments :  its  citizens  had  been  foremost  in  the  cause 
of  civil  and  religious  liberty.  Its  traditions  were 
associated  with  the  history  and  glories  of  England. 
Its  civic  potentates  had  entertained,  with  princely 
splendour,  kings,  conquerors,  ambassadors  and  states- 
men. Its  wealth  and  stateliness,  its  noble  old 
Guildhall  and  antique  pageantry,  were  famous 
throughout  Europe.  It  united,  like  an  ancient 
monarchy,  the  memories  of  a  past  age,  with  the 
pride  and  powers  of  a  living  institution. 

Such  a  corporation  as  this  could  not  be  lightly 
Efforts  to  touched.  The  constitution  of  its  governing 
reform  it.  "body:  its  powcrful  companies  or  guilds: 
its  courts  of  civil  and  criminal  jurisdiction:  its 
varied  municipal  functions :  its  peculiar  customs : 
its  extended  powers  of  local   taxation, — all   these 

'  See  Reports  of  Lords'  Committees  on  Rates  and  Municipal 
Franchise,  1869,  and  Elective  Franchise,  1860. 


Corporations  in  Scotland.  287 

demanded  careful  inquiry  and  consideration.  It  was 
not  until  1837  that  the  commissioners  were  able 
to  prepare  their  report ;  and  it  was  long  before  any 
scheme  for  the  reconstitution  of  the  municipality 
was  proposed.  However  superior  to  the  close  corpo- 
rations which  Parliament  had  recently  condemned, 
many  defects  and  abuses  needed  correction.  Some 
of  these  the  corporation  itself  proceeded  to  correct ; 
and  others  it  sought  to  remedy,  in  1852,  by  means 
of  a  private  bill.  In  1853,  another  commission 
of  eminent  men  was  appointed,  whose  able  report 
formed  the  basis  of  a  government  measure  in  1856.^ 
This  bill,  however,  was  not  proceeded  with ;  nor 
have  later  measures,  for  the  same  purpose  hitherto 
been  accepted  by  Parliament.^  Yet  it  cannot  be 
doubted  that  this  great  institution  will  be  eventually 
brought  into  harmony  with  the  recognised  principles 
of  free  municipal  government. 

The  history  of  municipal  corporations  in  Scotland 
resembles  that  of  England,  in  its  leading  corpora- 
characteristics.     The  royal  burghs,  being  IcTiind 
the  property  of  the  crown,  were  the  first  to  j^oyai 
receive  corporate  privileges.     The  earHer  ^^^^^• 
burgesses  were   tenants   of  the   orown,  with   whom 
were   afterwards  associated  the   trades  or   crafts  of 
the    place,   which    comprised    the    main   body  of 
inhabitants.     In  the  fourteenth   century,  the  con- 
stitution  of  these  municipalities   appears  to  have 
become  popular ;   and  the  growing  influence   and 

*  Sir  George  Grey,  April  1st,  1856. — Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  cxli. 
314. 

3  Sir  George  Grey,  1858.— Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  cxlviii.  738;  Sir 
George  Lewis,  1859  and  1860.    Ihid.,  cliv.  946 ;  clvi.  282. 


288  Local  Government. 

activity  of  the  commonalty  excited  the  jealousy  of 
more  powerful  interests.^  The  latter,  without  wait- 
ing for  the  tedious  expedient  of  usurpation,  obtained 
an  Act  of  the  Scottish  Parliament  in  1469,  which 
deprived  the  burgesses  of  their  electoral  rights,  and 
established  a  close  principle  of  self-election.  The 
old  council  of  every  burgh  was  to  choose  the  new 
council  for  the  year,  and  the  two  councils  together, 
with  one  person  representing  each  craft,  were  to 
elect  the  burgh  officers.^ 

Municipal  privileges  were  also  granted  to  other 
other  burghs,  under  the  patronage  of  territorial 

btirghs.  nobles,  or  the  church.  The  rights  of  bur- 
gesses varied  in  different  places :  but  they  were 
generally  dependent  upon  their  patrons. 

Neither  of  these  two  classes  of  municipalities  had 
Close  cha-  cujoyed  for  centuries  the  least  pretence 
these  of  a  popular  constitution.     Their  property 


munici- 


pauties.  and  revenues,  their  rights  of  local  taxation, 
their  patronage,  their  judicature,  and  the  election 
of  representatives  in  Parliament,  were  all  vested  in 
small  self-elected  bodies.  The  administration  of 
these  important  trusts  was  characterised  by  the  same 
abuses  as  those  of  English  corporations.  The  pro- 
perty was  corruptly  alienated  and  despoiled :  sold  to 
nobles  and  other  favoured  persons, — sometimes  even 
to  the  provost  himself, — at  inadequate  prices :  leased 
at  nominal  rents  to  members  of  the  council;  and 
improvidently  charged  with  debts.^  The  revenues 
were  wasted  by  extravagant  salaries, — jobbing  con- 

'  Rep.  of  Commrs,  1835,  p.  18.  ^  ggotg  ^^^g^  1459^  ^^  5^ 

3  Eep.,  1835,  p.  30. 


Mimicipal  Reforms y  Scotland.         289 

tracts,  —  public  works  executed  at  an  exorbitant 
cost, — and  civic  entertainments.'  By  such  malad- 
ministration several  burghs  were  reduced  to  insol- 
vency.^ Charitable  funds  were  wasted  and  mis- 
applied :  ^  the  patronage,  distributed  among  the 
ruling  families,  was  grossly  abused.  Incompetent 
persons,  and  even  boys,  were  appointed  to  offices  of 
trust.  At  Forfar,  an  idiot  performed  for  twenty 
years  the  responsible  duties  of  town  clerk.  Lucra- 
tive offices  were  sold  by  the  councils.'*  Judicature 
was  exercised  without  fitness  or  responsibility.  The 
representation  formed  part  of  the  narrow  parlia- 
mentary organisation  by  which  Scotland,  like  her 
sister  kingdoms,  was  then  governed. 

Many  of  these  abuses  were  notorious  at  an  early 
period ;  and   the  Scottish  Parliament  fre-  Municipal 
quently  interposed  to  restrain  them.^  They  s^5S?d. 
continued,  however,  to  flourish  ;  and  were  ^®^^* 
exposed  by   parliamentary  inquiries  in   1793,   and 
again  in  1819,  and  the  two  following  years.^     The 
latter  were  followed  by  an  Act  in  1822,  regulating 
the  accounts  and  administration  of  the  royal  burghs, 
checking   the   expenditure,  and   restraining  abuses 
in  the  sale  and  leasing  of  property,  and  the  contract- 
ing of  debts.^     But  it  was  reserved  for  the  first  re- 
formed Parliament  to  deal  with  the  greatest  evil, 

1  Eep.,  1821,  p.  14  ;  Eep.,  1835,  p.  34. 
-   Eep.,  1819,  p.  15,  23  ;  lUd.,  1835,  p.  36. 
"  Eep.,  1819,  p.  23 ;  Ihid.,  1835,  p.  38. 
4  Eep.,  1820,  p.  4  ;  Ihid.,  1835,  p.  67. 

•  Scots  Acts,  1491,  c.  19  :  1503,  c.  36,  37;  1535,  c.  35;  1593,  c. 
SO ;  1693,  c.  45  ;  Eep.  of  1835,  p.  22-28. 

«  Eep.  of  Comm.  Committees,  1819,  1820,  and  1821. 
'  3  Geo.  IV.  c.  91. 

VOL.  III.  U 


290  Local  Government, 

and  the  first  cause  of  all  other  abuses — the  close 
constitution  of  these  burghs.  The  Scotch  Eeform 
Act  had  already  swept  away  the  electoral  monopoly 
which  had  placed  the  entire  representation  of  the 
country  in  the  hands  of  the  government  and  a  few 
individuals;  and  in  the  following  year,  the  ten 
pound  franchise  was  introduced  as  the  basis  of  new 
municipal  constitutions.  The  system  of  self-election 
was  overthrown,  and  popular  government  restored. 
The  people  of  Scotland  were  impatient  for  this 
remedial  measure ;  and,  the  abuses  of  the  old  cor- 
porate bodies  being  notorious,  Parliament  did  not 
even  wait  for  the  reports  of  commissioners  appointed 
to  inquire  into  them :  but  proceeded  at  once  to 
provide  a  remedy.  The  old  fabric  of  municipal  ad- 
ministration fell  without  resistance,  and  almost  in 
silence :  its  only  defence  being  found  in  the  protest 
of  a  solitary  peer.^ 

In  the  corporations  of  Ireland,  popular  rights  had 
Corpora-       been  recognised,  at  least  in  form, — though 

tions, 

Ireland.  the  pccuHar  condition  of  that  country  had 
never  been  favourable  to  their  exercise.  Even  the 
charters  of  James  I.,  designed  to  narrow  the  founda- 
tions of  corporate  authority,  usually  incorporated 
the  inhabitants,  or  commonalty  of  boroughs.^  The 
ruling  bodies,  however,  having  the  power  of  admit- 
ting freemen,  whether  resident  or  not,  readily  appro- 
priated all  the  power  and  patronage  of  local  admin- 
istration. In  the  greater  number  of  boroughs,  the 
council,  or  other  ruling  body,  was  practically  self- 

>  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xx.  563-576 ;  3  &  4  Will.  IV.  c.  76,  77. 
2  Rep.  of  Commrs.  1835,  p.  7. 


Abuses  of  Irish  Corporations.  291 

elected.  The  freemen  either  had  no  rights,  or  were 
debarred,  by  usurpation,  from  asserting  them.  In 
other  boroughs,  where  the  rights  of  freemen  were 
acknowledged,  the  council  were  able  to  overrule  the 
inhabitants  by  the  voices  of  non-resident  freemen, 
— their  own  nominees  and  creatures.  Close  self- 
election,  and  irresponsible  power,  were  the  basis  of 
nearly  all  the  corporations  of  Ireland.^  In  many 
boroughs,  patrons  filled  the  council  with  their  own 
dependents,  and  exercised  uncontrolled  authority 
over  the  property,  revenues,  and  government  of  the 
municipality. 

It  were  tedious  to  recount  the  more  vulgar  abuses 
of  this  system.  Corporate  estates  appro-  ^^jj. 
priated,  or  irregularly  acquired  by  patrons,  ^^'^^^ 
and  others  in  authority :  leases  corruptly  granted : 
debts  recklessly  contracted;  excessive  tolls  levied, 
to  the  injury  of  trade  and  the  oppression  of  the 
poor :  exclusive  trading  privileges  enjoyed  by  free- 
men, to  the  detriment  of  other  inhabitants :  the 
monopoly  of  patronage  by  a  few  families:  the 
sacrifice  of  the  general  welfare  of  the  community  to 
the  particular  interests  of  individuals  :  such  were 
the  natural  results  of  close  government  in  Ireland, 
as  elsewhere.^  The  proper  duties  of  local  govern- 
ment were  neglected  or  abused ;  and  the  inhabitants 
of  the  principal  towns  were  obliged  to  seek  more 
efficient  powers  for  paving,  lighting,  and  police, 
under  separate  boards  constituted  by  local  Acts,  or 
by  a  general  measure  of  1828,  enacted  for  that  pm- 

*  Eep.  of  Commrs.,  p.  13-18. 
2  Ibid.,  17-38. 

TJ  2 


292  Local  Government. 

pose.*  But  there  were  constitutional  evils  greater 
than  these.  Corporate  towns  retui*ned  members  to 
Parliament ;  and  the  patrons,  usurping  the  franchises 
of  the  people,  reduced  them  to  nomination  boroughs. 
Exclusion  of  ^^*?  above  all,  Catholics  were  everywhere 
Catholics,  excluded  from  the  privileges  of  municipal 
government.  The  remedial  law  of  1793,  which  re- 
stored their  rights,^  was  illusory. .  Not  only  were 
they  still  denied  a  voice  in  the  council :  but  even 
admission  to  the  freedom  of  their  own  birthplaces. 
A  narrow  and  exclusive  interest  prevailed, — in  poli- 
tics, in  local  administration,  and  in  trade, — over 
Catholic  communities,  however  numerous  and  im- 
portant.^ Catholics  could  have  no  confidence  either 
in  the  management  of  municipal  trusts,  or  in  the 
administration  of  justice.  Among  their  own  towns- 
men, their  faith  had  made  them  outlaws. 

The  Eeform  Act  established  a  new  elective  fran- 
irisTi  Cor-     chisc  ou  a  widcr  basis  ;  and  the  legislature 

porations  .  , 

Bills.  soon  afterwards  addressed  itself  to  the  con- 

sideration of  the  evils  of  municipal  misgovernment. 
But  the  Irish  corporations  were  not  destined  to  fall, 
like  the  Scotch  burghs,  without  a  struggle. 

In  1835,  Lord  Melbourne's  government  introduced 
Corpora-  ^  ^^  ^^^  ^^  rcconstitution  of  the  Irish 
land^Biu".  corporatious,  upon  the  same  principles  as 
^^^^'  those  already  applied  to  other  parts  of  the 

United  Kingdom.  It  was  passed  by  the  Commons 
without  much  discussion :  but  was  not  proceeded 

»  9  Geo.  IV.  c.  82 ;  Eep.  of  Commrs.,  p.  21. 
2  33  Geo.  III.  c.  21  (Irish).  Bu^^ra,  p.  HI. 
^  Eep.  of  Commrs,,  p.  16. 


Irish  Corporations  Bills.  293 

with  in  the  Lords,  on  account  of  the  late  period  of 
the  session.^  In  the  following  year  it  was  j^gnewed 
renewed,  with  some  modifications:^  when  ^^^i^^^- 
it  encountered  new  obstacles.  The  Protestant  party 
in  Ireland  were  suffering  under  grave  discourage- 
ments. Catholic  emancipation  and  Parliamentary, 
reform  had  overthrown  their  dominion  :  their  church 
was  impoverished  by  the  refusal  of  tithes,  and 
threatened  with  an  appropriation  of  her  revenues  ; 
and  now  their  ancient  citadels,  the  corporations, 
were  invested.  Here  they  determined  to  take  their 
stand.  Their  leaders,  however,  unable  openly  to 
raise  this  issue,  combated  the  measure  on  other 
grounds.  Adverting  to  the  peculiar  condition  of 
Ireland,  they  claimed  an  exceptional  form  of  Jocal 
government.  Hitherto,  it  was  said,  all  local  juris- 
diction had  been  exercised  by  one  exclusive  party. 
Popular  election  would  place  it  in  the  hands  of 
another  party,  no  less  dominant.  If  the  former  sys- 
tem had  caused  distrust  in  local  government  and  in 
the  administration  of  justice,  the  proposed  system 
would  cause  equal  jealousy  on  the  other  side. 
Catholic  ascendency  would  now  be  the  rule  of  muni- 
cipal government.  Nor  was  there  a  middle  class  in 
Ireland  equal  to  the  functions  proposed  to  be  in- 
trusted to  them.  The  wealth  and  intelligence  of 
Protestants  would  be  overborne  and  outnumbered 
by  an  inferior  class  of  Catholic  townsmen.  It  was 
denied  that  boroughs  had  ever  enjoyed  a  popular 
franchise.     The  corporations  prior  to  James  I.  had 

»  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxx.  230,  6U,  &c. 
*  Ibid.^  xxxi.  496,  1019. 


294  ■    Locat  Gove7^nment. 

been  founded  as  outworks  of  •Engiish  authority, 
among  a  hostile  people;  and  after  that  period,  as 
citadels  of  Protestant  ascendency.  It  was  further 
urged  that  few  of  the  Irish  boroughs  required  a 
municipal  organisation.  On  these  grounds  Sir 
Eobert  Peel  and  the  opposition  proposed  a  funda- 
mental change  in  the  ministerial  scheme.  They 
consented  to  the  abolition  of  the  old  corporations : 
but  declined  to  establish  new  municipal  bodies  in 
their  place.  They  proposed  to  provide  for  the  local 
administration  of  justice  by  sheriffs  and  magistrates 
appointed  by  the  crown :  to  vest  all  corporate  pro- 
perty in  royal  commissioners,  for  distribution  for 
municipal  purposes ;  and  to  intrust  the  police  and 
local  government  of  towns  to  boards  elected  under 
the  Greneral  Lighting  and  Watching  Act  of  1828.^ 

The  Commons  would  not  listen  to  proposals  for 
denying  municipal  government  to  Ireland,  and  vest- 
ing local  authority  in  officers  appointed  by  the 
crown :  but  the  Lords  eagerly  accepted  them ;  and 
the  bill  was  lost.^ 

In  the  following  year,  a  similar  measure  was  again 
Biu  of  passed  by  the  Commons,  but  miscarried  in 
1837.  ^]jQ  other  House  by  reason  of  delays,  and 

the  king's  death.  In  1838,  the  situation  of  parties 
^jjj  ^j  and  the  determined  resistance  of  the  Lords 

1838-9.  ^Q  ^^Q  Irish  policy  of  the  government, 
brought  about  concessions  and  compromise.  Minis- 
ters, by  abandoning  the  principle  of  appropriation, 

*  Debates  on  second  reading,  Feb.  29th,  and  on  Lord  F.  E,2;prton  s 
instruction,  March  7th. — Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxxi.  1050,  1308. 

*  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxxiv.  963,  &c. 


Irish  Corporations  Act,  1840.        295 

in  regard  to  the  Irish  Church  revenues,  at  length 
attained  a  settlement  of  the  tithe  question  ;  and  it 
was  understood  that  the  Lords  would  accept  a  cor- 
poration bill.  Yet  in  this  and  the  following  years 
the  two  Houses  disagreed  upon  the  municipal  fran- 
chise and  other  provisions ;  and  again  the  ministerial 
measures  were  abandoned.  In  1840,  a  ^.^^^^ 
sixth  bill  was  introduced,  in  which  large  ^^*^- 
concessions  were  made  to  the  Lords.*  Further 
amendments,  however,  were  introduced  by  their 
lordships,  which  ministers  and  the  Commons  were 
constrained  to  accept.  The  tedious  controversy  of 
six  years  was  at  length  closed:  but  the  measure 
virtually  amounted  to  a  scheme  of  municipal  dis- 
franchisement. 

Ten  corporations  only  were  reconstituted  by  the 
bill,  with  a  ten  pound  franchise.     Fifty-  rj^eirisij 
eight  were  abolished :  ^  but  any  borough  SoSTct, 
with  a  population  exceeding  3,000  might  ^^^* 
obtain  a  charter  of  incorporation.     The  local  affairs 
and  property  of  boroughs,  deprived  of  corporations, 
were  to  be  under  the  management  of  commissioners 
elected  according  to  the  provisions  of  the  Greneral 
Lighting   and  Watching   Act,  or  of  the  poor-law 
guardians.^     The  measure  was  a  compromise  ;  and, 
however  imperfect  as  a  general  scheme  of  local  go- 
vernment, it  at  least  corrected  the  evils  of  the  old 
system,  and  closed  an  irritating  contest  between  two 
powerful  parties. 

The    reconstitution    of   municipal    corporations, 

>  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  li.  641;  liii.  1160 ;  Iv.  183,  1216. 
2  Schedules  B  and  C  of  Act.  ^  3  &  4  yict.  c.  108. 


296  Local  Governjnent. 

upon  a  popular  basis,  has  widely  extended  the 
Local  im-  principle  of  local  self-government.  The 
ffpoSe  same  principle  has  been  applied,  without 
^''^-  reserve,  to  the  management  of  other  local 

affairs.  Most  of  the  principal  towns  of  the  United 
Kingdom  have  obtained  Local  Acts,  at  different 
times,  for  improvements, — for  lighting,  paving,  and 
police, — for  waterworks, — for  docks  and  harbours  ; 
and  in  these  measm-es,  the  principle  of  elected  and 
responsible  boards  has  been  accepted  as  the  rule  of 
local  administration.  The  functions  exercised  under 
these  Acts  are  of  vast  importance,  not  only  to  the 
localities  immediately  concerned,  but  to  the  general 
welfare  of  the  community.  The  local  administration 
of  Liverpool  resembles  that  of  a  maritime  state.  In 
the  order  and  wise  government  of  large  populations, 
by  local  authority,  rests  the  general  security  of  the 
realm.  And  this  authority  is  everywhere  based  upon 
representation  and  responsibility.  In  other  words, 
the  people  who  dwell  in  towns  have  been  permitted 
to  govern  themselves. 

Extensive  powers  of  administration  have  also  been 
T     ,  intrusted  to  local  boards  constituted  under 

Local 

constituted  general  statutes  for  the  sanitary  regulation, 
S^Jerai  improvement,  and  police  of  towns  and 
^^^^'  populous  districts.^    Again,  the  same  prin- 

ciple was  adopted  in  the  election  of  boards  of 
guardians  for  the  administration  of  the  new  poor 

»  Public  Health  Act,  1848;  Local  Government  Act,  1858;  Toul- 
min  Smith's  Local  Government  Act,  1858;  Glen's  Law  of  Public 
Health  and  Local  Government;  Police  (Scotland)  Acts,  1850 ;  Towns' 
Improvement  (Scotland)  Act,  1860;  Police  and  Improvement  (Scot- 
land) Act,  1862,  consolidating  previous  Acts. 


Courts  of  Quarter  Sessions.         297 

laws,  throughout  the  United  Kingdom.  And  lastly, 
in  1855,  the  local  affairs  of  the  metropolis  were  in- 
trusted to  the  Metropolitan  Board  of  Works, — a 
free  municipal  assembly, — elected  by  a  popular  con- 
stituency, and  exercising  extended  powers  of  taxation 
and  local  management.^ 

The  sole  local  administration,  indeed,  which  has 
still  been  left  without   representation,  is  courts  of 

1       •     1    Quarter 

that  of  counties;  where  rates  are  levied  sessions. 
and  expenditure  sanctioned  by  magistrates  appointed 
by  the  crown.  Selected  from  the  nobles  and  gentry 
of  the  county  for  their  position,  influence,  and 
character,  the  magistracy  undoubtedly  afford  a 
virtual  representation  of  its  interests.  The  fore- 
most men  assemble  and  discuss  the  affairs  in  which 
they  have  themselves  the  greatest  concern  :  but  the 
principles  of  election  and  responsibility  are  wanting. 
This  peculiarity  was  noticed  in  1836  by  the  com- 
mission on  county  rates  ;2  and  efforts  have  since 
been  made,  first  by  Mr.  Hume,^  and  afterwards  by 
Mr.  Milner  Gribson,^  to  introduce  responsibility  into 
county  administration.  It  was  proposed  to  establish 
financial  boards,  constituted  of  members  elected  by 
boards  of  guardians,  and  of  magistrates  chosen  by 
themselves.  To  the  representative  principle  itself 
few   objections   were   offered ;    but   no    scheme  for 

*  Metropolis  Local  Management  Acts,  1855,  1862.  Toulmin 
Smith's  Metropolis  Local  Management  Act. 

2  The  Commissioners  said :  '  No  other  tax  of  such  magnitude  is 
laid  upon  the  subject,  except  by  his  representatives.'  .  .  .  'The 
administration  of  this  fund  is  the  exercise  of  an  irresponsible  power 
intrusted  to  a  fluctuating  body.' 

=»  In  1837  and  1839.— Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  cvi.  125. 

♦  In  1840,  and  subsequently. — Ihid.^  cviii.  738. 


29^  Local  Government. 

carrying  it  into  efifect  has  yet  found  favour  with  the 
legislature. 

Counties  represent  the  aristocratic,  towns  the  de- 
Distinctive  n^ocratic,  principles  of  our  constitution, 
of  coT^fes  ^^  counties,  territorial  power,  ancestral 
and  towns,  jjonours,  family  connexions,  and  local  tra- 
ditions have  dominion.  The  lords  of  the  soil  still 
enjoy  influence  and  respect,  little  less  than  feudal. 
Whatever  forms  of  administration  may  be  estab- 
lished, their  ascendency  is  secure.  Their  power  is 
founded  upon  the  broad  basis  of  English  society : 
not  upon  laws  or  local  institutions.  In  towns,  power 
is  founded  upon  numbers  and  association.  The 
middle  classes, — -descendants  and  representatives  of 
the  stout  burghers  of  olden  times, — have  sway. 
The  wealth,  abilities,  and  public  virtues  of  eminent 
citizens  may  clothe  them  with  influence :  but  they 
derive  authority  from  the  free  suffrages  of  their 
fellow-citizens,  among  whom  they  dwell.  The  social 
differences  of  counties  and  towns  have  naturally 
ajffected  the  conditions  of  their  local  administration 
and  political  tendencies :  but  both  have  contributed, 
in  different  ways,  to  the  good  government  of  the 
state. 


Progress  of  Liberty  in  Ireland,         299 


CHAPTEE  XVI. 

government  of  ireland  before  the  union : the  legislature 

and  the  executive  : protestant  ascendency  : ireland  a 

dependency: — com:mercial  restrictions: — the  volunteers: — 
i^gislative  and  judicial  independence  granted  1782: — the 
united  irishmen  and  other  associations  : — the  rebellion  of 
1798: — THE   union: — its   benefits  deferred: — freedom  and 

EQUALITY   FINALLY  ASSURED. 

We  have  seen  liberty  steadily  advancing,  in  every 
form,  and  under  every  aspect,  throughout  Progress  of 

-.  ■,  .  liberty  in 

our  political  and  religious  institutions.  Ireland. 
And  nowhere  has  its  advance  been  more  conspicuous 
than  in  Ireland.  In  that  country,  the  English  laws 
and  constitution  had  been  established  as  if  in  mock- 
ery.^ For  ages  its  people  were  ruled,  by  a  con- 
quering and  privileged  race,  as  aliens  and  outlaws.^ 
Their  lands  were  wrested  from  them :  their  rigfhts 
trampled  under  foot :  their  blood  and  their  religion 
proscribed.^ 

Before   George   III,  commenced  his   reign,   the 
dawn  of  better  days  was  brightening  the  Government 
horizon ;  yet,  what  was  then  the  political  ^eforeS 
condition   of  his   Irish    subjects?      They  ^^^°^- 
were    governed    by    a    Parliament,   whence   every 

»  Leland,  Hist.,  i.  80,  &c. ;  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  33. 

•'  Davis,  100,  109. 

'  For  the  earlier  history  of  Ireland,  see  Plowden,  i.  1-332 ;  Le- 
land, Prelim.  Discourse ;  O'Halloran ;  Moore  ;  and  a  succinct  but  com- 
prehensive outline  by  Hallam,  Const.  Hist.,  chap,  xviii. 


300  Ireland. 

Catholic  was  excluded.  The  House  of  Lords  was 
The  Lords,  composed  of  prelates  of  the  Protestant 
church,  and  of  nobles  of  the  same  faith, — owners  of 
boroughs,  patrons  of  corporations,  masters  of  the 
representation,  and  in  close  alliance  with  the  Castle  J 
The  Com-  "^^^  House  of  Commous  assumed  to  repre- 
mons.  ggj^^   ^^  country :   but  the  elective  fran- 

chise,— narrow  and  illusory  in  other  respects, — was 
wholly  denied  to  five-sixths  of  the  people,^ — on 
account  of  their  i;eligion.3  Every  vice  of  the  Eng- 
lish representative  system  was  exaggerated  in  Ire- 
land. Nomination  boroughs  had  been  more  freely 
created  by  the  crown :  ^  in  towns,  the  members  were 
returned  by  patrons  or  close  corporations  :  in  coun- 
ties, by  great  proprietors.  In  an  assembly  of  300, 
twenty-five  lords  of  the  soil  alone  returned  no  less 
than  116  members.^  A  comparatively  small  number 
of  patrons  returned  a  majority;  and,  acting  in  con- 
cert, were  able  to  dictate  their  own  terms  to  the 
government.  So  well  were  their  influence  and  tac- 
tics recognised,  that  they  were  known  as  the  '  Par- 
liamentary undertakers.'  ^  Theirs  was  not  an  am- 
bition to  be  satisfied  with  political  power  and  ascen- 

»  Hard/s  Life  of  Lord  Charlemont,  i.  102. 

*  Primate  Boulter  admitted  that  there  were  five  Catholics  to  one 
Protestant  in  the  reign  of  George  II. — Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  269,  271 ; 
Grattan's  Life,  i.  64. 

3  2  Geo.  I.  c.  19 ;  I  Geo.  n.  c.  9,  s.  7. 

*  Leland,  ii.  437 ;  Plow-den's  Hist.,  i.  109  ;  App.  xr.  xvi. ;  Carte's 
Ormond,  i.  18;  Lord  Mountmorres'  Hist,  of  the  Irish  Parliament, 
i.  166,  &c. ;  Desiderata  Curiosa  Hibernica,  308 ;  Moore's  Hist.,  iv.  164. 

*  Massey  (on  the  authority  of  the  Bolton  MSS.)  Hist.,  iii.  264. 
See  also  "Wakefield's  Statistical  and  Political  Account  of  Ireland,  ii. 
301. 

*  Wilkinson's  Survey  of  South  of  Ireland,  57 ;  Adolphus'  Hist., 
i.  161. 


Duration  of  Parliaments.  301 

dency :  they  claimed  more  tangible  rewards, — titles, 
offices,  pensions, — for  themselves,  their  relatives  and 
dependents.  Self-interest  and  corruption  were  all 
but  universal,  in  the  entire  scheme  of  parliamentary 
government.  Two-thirds  of  the  House  of  Commons, 
on  whom  the  government  generally  relied,  were 
attached  to  its  interest  by  offices,  pensions,  or  pro- 
mises of  preferment.^  Patrons  and  nominees  alike 
exacted  favours ;  and  in  five-and-twenty  years,  the 
Irish  pension  list  was  trebled.^  Places  and  pensions, 
the  price  of  parliamentary  services,  were  publicly 
bought  and  sold  in  the  market.'  But  these  rewards, 
however  lavishly  bestowed,  failed  to  satisfy  the  more 
needy  and  prodigal,  whose  fidelity  was  purchased 
from  time  to  time  with  hard  cash.^  Parliamentary 
corruption  was  a  recognised  instrument  of  govern- 
ment :  no  one  was  ashamed  of  it.  Even  the  Speaker, 
whose  office  should  have  raised  him  above  the  low 
intrigues  and  sordid  interests  of  faction,  was  mainly 
relied  upon  for  the  management  of  the  House  of 
Commons.^  And  this  corrupt  and  servile  assembly, 
once   intrusted   with   power,   might   con-  Parliament 

expired 

tinue  to  abuse  it  for  an  indefinite  period,  only  on 

■■■  demise  of 

If  not  subservient  to  the  crown,   it  was  crown, 
dissolved :  but,  however  neglectful  of  the  rights  and 
interests  of  the  people,  it  was  firmly  installed  as 

'  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  360,  375.  See  also  analysis  of  the  minis- 
terial majority  in  1784,  in  the  Bolton  MSS.,  Massey's  Hist.,  iii. 
265. 

2  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  451 ;  supra^  Vol.  I.  p.  256. 

3  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  364,  378. 

•♦  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  374  ;  Irish  Debates,  i.  139 ;  Grattan's  Life,  i. 
97  ;  Walpole's  Journ.,  i.  399. 

^  Hardy's  Life  of  Lord  Charlemont,  i.  88. 


302  Ireland. 

their  master.  The  law  made  no  provision  for 
its  expiration,  save  on  the  demise  of  the  crown 
itself. 

Such  being  the  legislature,  to  whom  the  rights  of 
The  exe-  ^'^  pcople  wero  intrusted, — the  executive 
ditive.  power  was  necessarily  in  the  hands  of  those 

who  corruptly  wielded  its  authority.  The  lord- 
lieutenant,  selected  from  English  nobles  of  the 
highest  rank,  was  generally  superior  to  the  petty 
objects  of  local  politicians :  but  he  was  in  the  hands 
of  a  cabinet  consisting  of  men  of  the  dominant  fac- 
tion,— ^intent  upon  continuing  their  own  power, — 
and  ministering  to  the  ambition  and  insatiable 
greed  of  their  own  families  and  adherents.  Sur- 
rounded by  intrigues  and  troubles,  he  escaped  as 
much  as  possible  from  the  intolerable  thraldom  of 
a  residence  in  Ireland ;  and,  in  his  absence,  three 
men  governed  the  country  absolutely,  as  lords  jus- 
tices. Contending  among  themselves  for  influence 
and  patronage,  they  agreed  in  maintaining  the 
domination  of  a  narrow  oligarchy,  and  the  settled 
policy  of  Protestant  ascendency.^  As  if  to  mark 
the  principles  of  such  a  rule,  the  primate  bore  the 
foremost  place  in  the  administration  of  affairs.^ 

The  proscription  of  Catholics  at  once  insured  the 
Monopoly  power,  and  ministered  to  the  cupidity  of  the 
and  office,  ruliug  party.  Everyjudge,  every  magistrate, 
every  officer, — civil,  military  and  corporate, — was  a 

»  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  370;  Adolphus'  Hist.,  159-161;  Grattan's 
Life,  i.  97.  _ 

2  On  the  accession  of  George  III.,  the  lords  justices  were  the  pri- 
mate, Dr.  Stone,  Lord  Shannon,  a  former  speaker,  and  Mr.  Ponsonbv, 
then  holding  the  office  of  Speaker. 


Dependence  of  Ireland,  303 

cliurcliman.  No  Catholic  could  practise  the  law,* 
or  serve  upon  a  jury.  The  administration  of  justice, 
as  well  as  political  power,  was  monopolised  by  Pro- 
testants. A  small  junto  distributed  amDug  their 
select  band  of  followers  all  the  honours  and  patron- 
age of  the  state.  Every  road  to  ambition  was  closed 
against  Catholics, — the  bar,  the  bench,  the  army, 
the  senate,  and  the  magistracy.  And  Protestant 
nonconformists,  scarcely  inferior  in  numbers  to 
churchmen,  fared  little  better  than  Catholics.  They 
were,  indeed,  admitted  to  a  place  in  the  legislature, 
but  they  were  excluded,  by  a  Test  Act,  from  every 
civil  office,  from  the  army,  and  from  corporations , 
and,  even  where  the  law  failed  to  disqualify  them, 
they  might  look  in  vain  for  promotion  to  a  clique 
who  discerned  merit  in  none  but  churchmen.  Such 
were  the  rights  and  liberties  of  the  Irish  people ; 
and  such  the  character  and  policy  of  their  rulers. 

And  while  the  internal  polity  of  Ireland  g^bordina- 
was   exclusive,   illiberal,  and  corrupt,  the  iJ.e?aSdto 
country,  in  its  relations  to  England,  still  f^^f^^'^ 
bore  the  marks  of  a  conquered  province.  ^^^^' 
The   Parliament  was  not  a  free   legislature,  witJH 
ample  jurisdiction  in  making  laws  and  voting  taxes. 
By  one  of  '  Poynings'  Acts,'^  in  the  reign  of  Henry 
VII.,  the  Irish  Parliament  was  not  summoned  until 
the   Acts   it   was  called  upon  to  pass  had  already 
been  approved  and  certified,  under  the  great  seal,  in 
England.     Such  Acts  it  might  discuss  and  reject, 
but  could  not  amend.    This  restriction,  however,  was 
afterwards  relaxed ;  and  laws  were  certified  in  the 

»  Plo\yden's  Hist.,  i.  271.  *  10  Henry  VII.  c.  4  (Irish). 


304  Ireland. 

same  manner,  after  the  opening  of  Parliament.'* 
Parliament  could  say  '  aye '  or  '  no  '  to  the  edicts  of 
the  crown :  but  could  originate  nothing  itseif.  Even 
money  bills  were  transmitted  to  the  Commons  in 
the  same  imperial  form.  Soon  after  the  revolution, 
the  Commons  had  vainly  contended  for  the  privilege 
of  originating  grants  to  the  crown,  like  their  English 
prototypes  :  but  their  presumption  was  rebuked  by 
the  chief  governor,  and  the  claim  pronounced  un- 
founded by  the  judges  of  both  countries.*  The  re- 
jection of  a  money  bill  was  also  visited  with  rebuke 
and  protest.^ 

The  Irish  Parliament,  however,  released  itself 
from  this  close  thraldom  by  a  procedure  more  con- 
sonant with  English  usage,  and  less  openly  ob- 
noxious to  their  independence.  Heads  of  bills  were 
prepared  by  either  House,  and  submitted  to  the 
Privy  Council  in  Ireland,  by  whom  they  were  trans- 
mitted to  the  king,  or  withheld  at  their  pleasure.  If 
approved  by  His  Majesty,  with  or  without  amend- 
ments, they  were  returned  to  the  House  in  which 
they  had  been  proposed,  where  they  were  read  three 
times,  but  could  not  be  amended.'*  The  crown, 
however,  relinquished  no  part  of  its  prerogative ; 
and  money  bills  continued  to  be  transmitted  from 
the  Privy  Council,  and  were  accepted  by  the 
Commons.^ 

^  3  &  4  Philip  and  Mary,  c,  4  (Irish) ;  Lord  Mountmorres'  Hist, 
of  Irish  Pari.,  i.  48-50  ;  Blackstone's  Comm.  (Kerr),  1,  84. 

-  Lord  Mountmorres'  Hist,  i.  47  ;  ii.  142,  184. 

^  In  1692. — Com.  Journ.  (Ireland),  ii.  35;  Lord  Mountmorres* 
Hist.,  i.  54  ;  Hardy's  Life  of  Lord  Charlemont,  i.  246. 

*  Lord  Mountttrorres'  Hist.,  i.  08,  63  ;  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  396,  n. 

^  In  1760  a  BLl  was  so  tranamitted  and  passed. — Grattan's  Life, 
i.67. 


Supremacy  of  the  English  Parliament,  305 

These  restrictions  were  marks  of  the  dependence  of 
the  legislature  upon  the  crown :  other  laws  supremacy 
and  customs  proclaimed  its  subordination  Siment  of* 
to  the  Parliament  of  England.  That  im-  ^°^^^°"^- 
perial  senate  asserted  and  exercised  the  right  of 
passing  laws  '  to  bind  the  people  and  kingdom  of 
Ireland ; '  and  in  the  sixth  of  Greorge  I.  passed  an 
Act  explicitly  affirming  this  right,  in  derogation  of 
the  legislative  authority  of  the  national  council  sit- 
ting in  Dublin.^  Its  judicature  was  equally  over- 
borne. The  appellate  jurisdiction  of  the  Irish  House 
of  Lords  was  first  adjudged  to  be  subordinate  to  that 
of  the  highest  court  of  appeal  in  England,  and  then 
expressly  superseded  and  annulled  by  a  statute  of 
the  English  Parliament.^  The  legislature  of  Ireland 
was  that  of  a  British  dependency.  Whether  such  a 
Parliament  were  free  or  not,  may  have  little  con- 
cerned the  true  interests  of  the  people  of  Ireland, 
who  owed  it  nothing  but  bondage  :  but  the  national 
pride  was  stung  by  a  sense  of  inferiority  and  depend- 
ence. 

The  subordination  of  Ireland  was  further  testified 
in  another  form,  at  once  galling  to  her  commercial 
pride,  and  injurious  to  her  prosperity.  To  "^^'^^^i^^- 
satisfy  the  jealous  instincts  of  English  traders,  her 
commerce  had  been  crippled  with  intolerable  pro- 
hibitions and  restraints.     The  export  of  her  produce 

»  10  Henry  VII.  c.  22  (Irish) ;  Carte's  Life  of  Ormond,  iii.  65 ; 
Lord  Mountmorres'  Hist,  i.  360  ;  Comm.  Journ.  (England),  June 
27th  and  30th,  1698  ;  Pari.  Hist,  v.  1181;  Plowden's  Hist,  i.  244; 
Statute  6  Geo.  I.  e.  5. 

'  6  Geo.  I.  c.  5. — Pari.  Hist.,  vii.  642 ;  Lord  Mountmorres'  Hist., 
i.  339. 

VOL.  III.  X 


3o6  Ireland, 

and  manufactures  to  England  was  nearly  interdicted : 
all  direct  trade  with  foreign  countries  and  British 
possessions  prohibited.  Every  device  of  protective 
and  prohibitory  duties  had  been  resorted  to,  for  in- 
suring a  monopoly  to  English  commerce  and  manu- 
factures. Ireland  was  impoverished,  that  English 
traders  should  be  enriched.^ 

Such  were  the  laws  and  government  of  Ireland 
New  era        whou  Groorge  III.  succeodcd  to  its  crown  ; 

opened  nnder 

George  iH.  and  for  many  years  afterwards.  Already  a 
'  patriot '  party  had  arisen  to  expose  the  wrongs  of 
their  country,  and  advocate  her  claims  to  equality : 
but  hitherto  their  efforts  had  been  vain.  A  new 
era,  however,  was  now  about  to  open ;  and  a  century 
of  remedial  legislation  to  be  commenced,  for  repair- 
ing the  evils  of  past  misgovernment. 

One  of  the  first  improvements  in  the  administra- 
Eesideuce  tiou  of  Ireland  was  a  more  constant  resi- 
Meutenant.  douce  of  the  lord-Heuteuant.  The  mis- 
chievous rule  of  the  lords  justices  was  thus  abated, 
and  even  the  influence  of  the  Parliamentary  under- 
takers impaired :  but  the  viceroy  was  still  fettered 
by  his  exclusive  cabinet.^ 

Attempts  were  made  so  early  as  1761  to  obtain 
Octennial  ^  Septennial  Act  for  Ireland,  which  resulted 
Act,  1768.      jj^  ^jjg  passing  of  an  octennial  bill,  in  1768.3 

*  32  Charles  II.  c.  2,  prohibited  the  export  of  cattle,  sheep,  and 
live  stock;  10  &  11  Will.  III.  c.  10,  interdicted  the  export  of  wool; 
and  other  statutes  imposed  similar  restraints.  See  Pari.  Hist.,  xix. 
1100,  et  seq. ;  Swift's  Tract  on  Irish  Manufactures,  1720  ;  Works,  rii. 
15  ;  Short  View  of  the  State  of  Ireland,  1121  .—Ibid.,  324. 

*  Adolphus'  Hist.,  i.  331. 

'  This  difference  between  the  law  of  the  two  countries  was  intro- 
duced to  prevent  the  confusion  of  a  general  election,  on  both  sides 
of  the  Channel,  at  the  same  time. — Walpole's  Mem.,  iii.  155 ;  Lord 


Conflict  between  Exectctive  and  Commons.  307 

Without  popular  rights  of  election,  this  new  law 
was  no  great  security  for  freedom,  but  it  disturbed, 
early  in  the  reign  of  a  young  king,  the  indefinite 
lease  of  power,  hitherto  enjoyed  by  a  corrupt  con- 
federacy; while  discussion  and  popular  sentiments 
were  beginning  to  exercise  greater  influence  over 
the  legislature. 

A  new  Parliament  was  called,  after  the  passing  of 
the  Act,  in  which  the  country  party  gained  conflict  te- 
ground.    The  government  vainly  attempted  Serath-e 
to  supplant  the  undertakers  in  the  manage-  SmSous, 
ment   of  the    Commons,  and    were    soon  ■^'^^' 
brought   into   conflict   with    that   assembly.      The 
Commons  rejected  a  money  bill, '  because  ciaimto 
it  did  not  take  its  rise  in  that  House ; '  and  ^S'/Sus, 
in  order  to  prove  that  they  had  no  desire  ^'^^' 
to  withhold  supplies  from  the  crown,  they  made  a 
more  liberal  provision   than   had  been   demanded. 
The    lord-lieutenant,    however.   Lord    Townshend, 
marked  his  displeasure  at  this  proceeding,  by  pro- 
roguing Parliament  as  soon  as  the  supplies   were 
voted ;  and  protesting  against  the  vote  and  resolu- 
tion of  the  Commons,  as  a  violation  of  the  law,  and 
an  invasion  of  the  just  rights  of  the  crown.^  Bepeated 

proroga- 

So  gTave  was  this  difference,  that  the  lord-  tions. 
lieutenant  suspended  the  further  sitting  of  Parlia- 

Chestexfield's  Letters,  iv.  468  ;  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  352,  387  ;  Hardy's 
Life  of  Lord  Charlemont,  i.  248-261. 

»  Lords'  Joiirn.  (Ireland),  iv.  538.  The  lord-lieutenant,  not  con- 
tented with  this  speech  on  the  prorogation,  further  entered  a  separate 
protest  in  the  Lords'  Journal. — Commons'  Journal  (Ireland),  viii. 
323  ;  Debates  of  Parliament  of  Ireland,  ix.  181 ;  Plowden's  Hist,  of 
Ireland,  i.  396  ;  ii.  251  ;  Grattan's  Mem.,  i.  98-101  ;  Lord  Mount- 
morres'  Hist.,  i,  54 ;  Hardy's  Life  of  Lord  Charlemont,  i.  290. 

X  2 


3o8  Ireland, 

ment,  by  repeated  prorogations,  for  fourteen  months,' 
— a  proceeding  which  did  not  escape  severe  ani- 
madversion in  the  English  Parliament.^  Parliament, 
Dec.  21,  when  at  length  reassembled,  proved  not 
^"^*  more  tractable  than  before.     In  December, 

1771,  the  Commons  rejected  a  money  bill  because  it 
had  been  altered  in  England  ;^  and  again  in  1773, 
Oct  and  pursucd  the  same  course,  for  the  like  reason, 
Nov.  1775.  •  j^  regard  to  two  other  money  bills.*  In 
1775,  having  consented  to  the  withdrawal  of  four 
thousand  troops  from  the  Irish  establishment,  it  re- 
fused to  allow  them  to  be  replaced  by  Protestant 
troops  from  England,^ — a  resolution  which  evinced 
the  growing  spirit  of  national  independence.  And 
in  the  same  year,  having  agreed  upon  the  heads  of 
two  money  bills,^  which  were  returned  by  the 
British  cabinet  with  amendments,  they  resented  this 
interference  by  rejecting  the  bills  and  initiating 
others,  not  without  public  inconvenience  and  loss  ta 
the  revenue.^  This  first  octennial  Parliament  ex- 
hibited other  signs  of  an  intractable  temper,  and  was 
dissolved  in  1776.^  Nor  did  government  venture  to 
meet  the  new  Parliament  for  nearly  eighteen  months.* 

>  From  Dec.  26th,  1769,  till  Feb.  26th,  1771 ;  Comm.  Journ.  (Ire- 
land), viii.  354;  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  401. 

=  Mr.  G.  M.  Walsingham,  May  3rd,  1770;  Pari.  Hist.,  v.  309. 

'  Comm.  Journ.  (Ireland),  viii.  467 ;  Adolphns,  ii.  14 ;  Life  of 
Grattan,  i.  174-185. 

4  Dec.  27th,  1773 :  Comm.  Journ.  (Ireland),  ix.  74. 

*  Comm.  Journ.  (Ireland),  ix.  223  ;  Grattan's  Life,  i.  268. 

*  Viz.  a  Bill  for  additional  duties  on  beer,  tobacco,  &c. ;  and  an- 
other, imposing  stamp  duties. 

'  Dec.  21,  1775  ;  Comm.  Journ.,  Ireland,  ix.  244 ;  Plowden's  Hist., 
i.  435. 

»  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  441. 

*  The  old  Parliament  was  prorogued  in  June.  1776,  and  after- 


Condition  of  the  People,  309 

In  the  meantime,  causes  superior  to  the  acts  of  a 
government,  the  efforts  of  patriots,  and  the  ^^^^ 
combinations  of  parties,  were  rapidly  ad-  American 
vancing  the  independence  of  Ireland.  The  ^^'^* 
American  colonies  had  resented  restrictions  upon 
their  trade,  and  the  imposition  of  taxes  by  the 
mother  country;  and  were  now  in  revolt  against 
the  rule  of  England.  Who  could  fail  to  detect  the 
parallel  between  the  cases  of  Ireland  and  America  ? 
The  patriots  accepted  it  as  an  encouragement,  and 
their  rulers  as  a  warning.  The  painful  condition  of 
the  people  was  also  betraying  the  conse-  condition 
quences  of  a  selfish  and  illiberal  policy,  people. 
The  population  had  increased  with  astonishing  fe- 
cundity. Their  cheap  and  ready  food,  the  potato, 
— and  their  simple  wants,  below  the  standard  of 
civilised  life, — removed  all  restraints  upon  the  mul- 
tiplication of  a  vigorous  and  hardy  race.  Wars, 
famine,  and  emigration  had  failed  to  arrest  their 
progress :  but  misgovernment  had  deprived  them 
of  the  means  of  employment.  Their  country  was 
rich  in  all  the  gifts  of  Grod, — fertile,  abounding 
with  rivers  and  harbours,  and  adapted  alike  for 
agriculture,  manufactures,  and  commerce.  But  her 
agriculture  was  ruined  by  absentee  landlords,  negli- 
gent and  imskilful  tenants,  half-civilised  cottiers; 
and  by  restraints  upon  the  free  export  of  her  pro- 
duce. Her  manufactures  and  commerce, — the  na- 
tural resources  of  a  growing  population, — were 
crushed  by  the  jealousy  of  English  rivals.     To  the 

vrards  dissolved :  the  new  Parliament  did  not  meet  till  October 
14th,  1777.— Comm.  Joum.,  ix.  289,  &c.     Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  441. 


310  Ireland. 

ordinary  restraints  upon  her  industry  was  added,  in 
1776,  an  embargo  on  the  export  of  provisions.*  And 
while  the  industry  of  the  people  was  repressed  by 
bad  laws,  it  was  burthened  by  the  profusion  and 
venality  of  a  corrupt  government.  What  could  be 
expected  in  such  a  country,  but  a  wretched,  igno- 
rant, and  turbulent  peasantry,  and  agrarian  outrage? 
These  evils  were  aggravated  by  the  pressure  of  the 
American  war,  followed  by  hostilities  with  France.^ 
The  English  ministers  and  Parliament  were  awakened 
by  the  dangers  which  threatened  the  state,  to  the 
condition  of  the  sister  country ;  and  England's  peril 
became  Ireland's  opportunity. 

Encouragement  had  already  been  given  to  the 
commer-  Irish  fisheries  in  1775;^  and  in  1778, 
stiictions      Lord   Nugent,  supported   by   Mr.  Burke, 

removed, 

1778.  and  favom-ed    by   Lord   North,   obtained 

from  the  Parliament  of  England  a  partial  relaxation 
of  the  restrictions  upon  Irish  trade.  The  legisla- 
ture was  prepared  to  make  far  more  liberal  conces- 
sions :  but,  overborne  by  the  clamours  of  English 
traders,  withheld  the  most  important,  which  states- 
men of  all  parties  concurred  in  pronouncing  to  be 
just.'*  The  Irish,  confirmed  in  the  justice  of  their 
cause  by  these  opinions,  resented  the  undue  influ- 
ence of  their  jealous  rivals  ;  and  believed  that  com- 
mercial freedom  was  only  to  be  won  by  national 
equality. 

»  Grattan's  Life,  i.  283. 

•-  Ihid.,  283-289,  298,  &c.;  Hardy's  Life  of  Lord  Charlemont,  i. 
S68-379. 

a  15  Geo.  III.  c.  31 ;  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  430. 

*  Pari.  Hist.,  xix.  1100-1126;  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  459-466;  18 
Geo.  III.  c.  45  (flax  seed) ;  e.  65  (L'ish  shipping) ;  Adolphus'  Hist., 
ii.  651-554 ;  Grattan's  Life,  i.  330. 


The  Vohmteers,  311 

The   distresses   and   failing   revenue   of    Ireland 
again  attracted  the  attention  of  the  British  pn^her 
Parliament,  in  the  ensuing  session.^     Eng-  Jl^?^!^^ 
land  undertook  the  payment  of  the  troops  ^^^^* 
on  the  Irish   establishment  serving   abroad  ;2    and 
relieved    some   branches    of    her    industry :  ^    but 
still  denied  substantial  freedom  to  her  commerce, 
]\Ieanwhile,   the   Irish   were   inflamed    by   stirring 
oratory,  by  continued  suffering,  and  by  the  successes 
of  the  Americans  in  a  like  cause.     Disappointed  in 
their  expectations  of  relief  from  the  British  Parlia- 
ment, they  formed  associations  for  the  exclusion  of 
British    commodities,   and   the    encouragement   of 
native  manufactures.^ 

Another  decisive  movement  precipitated  the  crisis 
of  Irish  affairs.     The  French  war  had  en-  Thevo- 

l^uiteers, 

couraged  the  formation  of  several  corps  of  1779. 
volunteers  for  the  defence  of  the  country.  The 
most  active  promoters  of  this  array  of  military 
force,  were  members  of  the  country  party;  and 
their  political  sentiments  were  speedily  caught  up 
by  the  volunteers.  At  first  the  different  corps  were 
without  concert  or  communication  :^  but  in  the 
autumn  of  1779,  they  received  a  great  accession  of 
strength,  and  were  brought  into  united  action.  The 
country  had  been  drained  of  its  regular  army,  for 
the  American  war ;  and  its  coasts  were  threatened 
by  the  enemy.     The  government,  in  its  extremity, 

1  Pari.  Hist.,  xx.  Ill,  136,  248,  635,  663. 

2  King's  Message,  March  18th,  1779;  ParL  Hist.,  xs.  327. 
8  E.g.  hemp  and  tobacco.— 19  Geo.  III.  c.  37,  83. 

*  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  485;  Grattan's  Life,  i.  362-364;  Hardy's 
Life  of  Lord  Charlemont,  i.  389. 

6  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  487 ;  Grattan's  Life,  i.  343. 


312  Ireland. 

threw  itself  upon  the  volunteers, — distributed  16,000 
stand  of  arms, — and  invited  the  people  to  arm  them- 
selves, without  any  securities  for  their  obedience. 
The  volunteers  soon  numbered  42,000  men,  chose 
their  own  officers, — chiefly  from  the  country  party, — 
made  common  cause  with  the  people  against  the 
government,  shouted  for  free  trade ;  and  received 
the  thanks  of  Parliament  for  their  patriotism.^ 
Power  had  been  suffered  to  pass  from  the  executive 
and  the  legislature,  into  the  hands  of  armed  asso- 
ciations of  men,  holding  no  commissions  from  the 
crown,  and  independent  alike  of  civil  and  military 
authority.  The  government  was  filled  with  alarm 
and  perplexity ;  and  the  British  Parliament  re- 
sounded with  remonstrances  against  the  conduct  of 
ministers,  and  arguments  for  the  prompt  redress 
of  Irish  grievances.^  The  Parliament  of  Ireland 
showed  its  determination,  by  voting  supplies  for  six 
months  only  \^  and  the  British  Parliament,  setting 
itself  earnestly  to  work,  passed  some  important 
measures  for  the  relief  of  Irish  commerce.'* 

Meanwhile  the  volunteers,  daily  increasing  in 
Thevo-  discipline  and  militaiy  organisation,  were 
dmS  assuming,  more  and  more,  the  character  of 
SJenT  ^^  armed  political  association.  The  dif- 
ence^i78o.     fgrent  corps  assembled  for  drill,  and  for 

*  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  493 ;  Lord  SheflBeld's  Observations  on  State 
of  Ireland,  1785. 

-  Debate  on  Lord  Shelburne's  motion  in  the  Lords,  Dec.  1st, 
1779. — Pari.  Hist.,  xx.  1 156 ;  Debate  on  Lord  Upper-Ossory's  motion 
in  the  Commons,  Dec.  6th,  1779;  Ihid.,  1197;  Hardy's  Life  of  Lord 
Charlemont,  i.  380-382 ;  Grattan's  Life,  i.  368, 389,  397-400 ;  Moore's 
'Life  of  Lord  E.  Fitzgerald,  i.  187. 

«  Nov.,  1779  ;  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  506. 

*  Lord  North's  Propositions,  Dec.  13tli,  1779;  Pari,  Hist,  xx. 
1272;  20  Geo.  IILc.  6,  10,  18. 


M2t  tiny  Bill  made  permanent,        313 

discussion,  agreed  to  resolutions,  and  opened  an  ex- 
tensive communication  with  one  another.  Early 
in  1780,  the  volunteers  demanded,  with  one  voice, 
the  legislative  independence  of  Ireland,  and  libera- 
tion from  the  sovereignty  of  the  British  Parlia- 
ment.^ And  Mr.  Grrattan,  the  ablest  and  most 
temperate  of  the  Irish  patriots,  gave  eloquent 
expression  to  these  claims  in  the  Irish  House  of 
Commons.^ 

In  this  critical  conjuncture,  the  public  mind  was 
further  inflamed  by  another  interference  The  Mutiny 

•;  Bill  made 

of  the  government,  m  England.  Hitherto,  permanent. 
Ireland  had  been  embraced  in  the  annual  Mutiny 
Act  of  the  British  Parliament.  In  this  year,  how- 
ever, the  general  sentiment  of  magistrates  and  the 
people  being  adverse  to  the  operation  of  such  an 
Act,  without  the  sanction  of  the  Irish  legislature, 
Ireland  was  omitted  from  the  English  mutiny  bill ; 
and  the  heads  of  a  separate  mutiny  bill  were  trans- 
mitted from  Ireland.  This  bill  was  altered  by  the 
English  cabinet  into  a  permanent  Act.  Material 
iimendments  were  also  made  in  a  bill  for  opening 
the  sugar  trade  to  Ireland.^  No  constitutional 
security  had  been  more  cherished  than  that  of  an 
annual  mutiny  bill,  by  which  the  crown  is  effec- 
tually prevented  from  maintaining  a  standing  army, 
without  the  consent  of  Parliament.  This  security 
was  now  denied  to  Ireland,  just  when  she  was  most 
sensitive  to  her  rights,  and  jealous  of  the  sovereignty 

»  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  613. 
2  April  19th,  1780 ;  Grattan's  Life,  ii.  39-55. 
»  Pari.  Hist.,  xxi.  1293  ;  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  515,  &c.;  Grattan's 
Life,  ii.  60,  71,  85-100,  et  sea. 


314  Ireland, 

of  England.  The  Irisli  Parliament  submitted  to  the 
will  of  its  English  rulers :  but  the  volunteers  assem- 
bled to  denounce  them.  They  declared  that  their 
own  Parliament  had  been  bought  with  the  wealth 
of  Ireland  herself,  and  clamoured  more  loudly  than 
ever  for  legislative  independence.^  Nor  was  such 
an  innovation  without  effect  upon  the  constitutional 
rights  of  England,  as  it  sanctioned,  for  the  first 
time,  the  maintenance  of  a  military  force  within 
the  realm,  without  limitation  as  to  numbers  or 
dm-ation.  Troops  raised  in  England  might  be  trans- 
ferred to  Ireland,  and  there  maintained  under  mili^ 
tary  law,  independent  of  the  Parliaments  of  either 
country.  The  anomaly  of  this  measure  was  forcibly 
exposed  by  Mr.  Fox  and  the  leaders  of  Opposition, 
in  the  British  Parliament.^ 

The  volunteers  continued  their  reviews  and  po- 
Thevoiun-  litical  demonstrations,  under  the  Earl  of 
1780^1.  Charlemont,  with  increased  numbers  and 
improved  organisation ;  and  again  received  the 
thanks  of  the  Irish  Parliament.^  But  while  they 
were  acting  in  cordial  union  with  the  leaders  of  the 
country  party,  in  the  House  of  Commons,  the  go- 
vernment had  secured, — by  means  too  familiar  at 
the  Castle, — a  majority  of  that  assembly,  which 
Theconven-  steadily  resisted  further  concessions.'*  In 
Dungannon.  thoso  circumstauces,  delegates  from  all  the 

*  Grattan's  Life,  ii.  127,  et  seq. 

2  Feb.  20th,  23rd,  1781 ;  Pari.  Hist.,  xxi.  1292. 

3  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  629  ;  G-rattan's  Life,  ii.  103. 

4  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  535-555.  Mr.  Eden,  writing  to  Lord  North, 
Nov.  10th,  1781,  informs  him  that  the  Opposition  had  been  gained 
over,  and  adds:  '  Indeed,  I  have  hud  a  fatiguing  week  of  it  in  every 
respect.     On  Thursday  I  was  obliged  to  see  fifty-three  gentlemen 


Rockingham  Ministry. 


0^0 


volunteers  in  Ulster   were  invited  to  assemble  at 
Dungannon  on  tlie  15th  February  1782,  'to  root 
out  corruption  and  court  influence  from  the  legisla- 
tive body,'  and  '  to  deliberate  on  the  present  alarming 
situation  of  public  affairs.'     The  meeting  was  held 
in  the  church  :  its  proceedings  were  conducted  with 
the  utmost  propriety  and  moderation ;  and  it  agreed, 
almost   unanimously,  to  resolutions   declaring  the 
right  of  Ireland  to  legislative  and  judicial  independ- 
ence, and  free  trade.^       On  the  22nd5  Mr.  ^^  ^^^^ 
Grrattan,  in  a  noble  speech,  moved  an  ad-  pebfSnd^^' 
dress  of  the   Commons   to   His   Majesty,  ^^^^* 
asserting  the  same  principles.^     His  motion  was  de- 
feated, as  well  as  another  by  Mr.  Flood,  ^j-j.  -^^^^^ 
declaring  the  legislative  independence  of  re*b?26th, 
the  Irish  Parliament.^  i^^^. 

In  the  midst  of  these  contentions.  Lord  Eocking- 
ham's  liberal  administration  was  formed.  Measures  of 

the  Rocking" 

who  recalled  Lord  Carlisle,  and  appointed  liam  minis- 

'  ^^  try,  April, 

the  Duke  of  Portland  as  lord-lieutenant.  i782. 
While  the  new  ministers  were  concerting  measures 
for  the  government  of  Ireland,  Mr.  Eden,  secretary 
to  Lord  Carlisle, — who  had  resisted  all  the  demands 
of  the  patriots  in  the  Irish  Parliament, — hastened  to 
England  ;  and  startled  the  House  of  Commons  with 
a  glowing  statement  of  the  dangers  he  had  left 
behind  him,  and  a  motion  to  secure  the  legislative 


separately  in  the  course  of  the  morning,  from  eight  till  two  o'clock.' 
Beresford  Corr.,i.  188  ;  Correspondence  of  Lord  Lieutenant,  Grrattan'$ 
Life,  ii.  153-177. 

»  Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  56i-569  ;  Hardy's  Life  of  Lord  Charlemont, 
ii.  1,  et  seq. ;  Life  of  Grattan,  ii.  203,  et  seq. 

2  Irish  Pari.  Deb.,  i.  266.  ^  j^ji^^  279. 


3i6  Irelaftd. 

independence  of  Ireland.  TTis  motion  was  with- 
drawn, amidst  general  indignation  at  the  factious 
motives  by  which  it  had  been  prompted.^  On  the 
following  day,  the  king  sent  a  message  to  both 
houses,  recommending  the  state  of  Ireland  to  their 
serious  consideration:  to  which  a  general  answer 
was  returned,  with  a  view  to  the  co-operation  of  the 
April  16th,  Irisli  Parliament.  In  Dublin,  the  Duke  of 
1782.  Portland  communicated  a  similar  message, 

which  was  responded  to  by  an  address  of  singular 
temper  and  dignity, — justly  called  the  Irish  Decla- 
ration of  Eights.*  The  Irish  Parliament  unani- 
mously claimed  for  itself  the  sole  authority  to  make 
laws  for  Ireland,  and  the  repeal  of  the  permanent 
j^^gj^^j^  Mutiny  Act.  These  claims  the  British 
^^udMai  Parliament,  animated  by,  a  spirit  of  wis- 
^^te^  dom  and  liberality,  conceded  without  re- 
^'®^  luctance  or  hesitation.'     The  sixth  Geo.  I. 

was  repealed ;  and  the  legislative  and  judicial  autho- 
rity of  the  British  Parliament  renounced.  The  right 
of  the  Privy  Council  to  alter  biUs  transmitted  from 
Ireland  was  abandoned,  and  the  perpetual  Mutiny 
Act  repealed.  The  concession  was  gracefully  and 
honourably  made  ;  and  the  statesmen  who  had  con- 
sistently advocated  the  rights  of  Ireland,  while  in 
opposition,  could  proudly  disclaim  the  influence  of 


>  April  Sth,  1782  :  ParL  Hist,  xxii.  1241-1264 ;  TVraxall's  Mem., 
iii.  29,  92  ;  Fors  Mem^  L  313 ;  Lord  J.  Eussell's  Life  of  Fox,  i. 
287-289  ;  Grattan's  Life,  iL  208 ;  Walpole's  JoTirn.,  ii.  538. 

'  Plowden's  HisL,  i.  595-599 ;  L^sh  Debates,  i.  332-346 ;  Grat- 
tan's  Life,  ii.  230,  et  teq. 

*  Debates  in  Lords  and  Commons,  May  17tli,  1782;  EarL  Hist., 

iiL  16-48  ;  Eoddngham  Mem.,  ii.  469-476. 


Diffic2tlties  of  Irish  Independe7tce,      317 

intimidation.*  The  magnanimity  of  the  act  was 
acknowledged  with  gratitude  and  rejoicings,  by  the 
Parliament  and  people  of  Ireland. 

But  English  statesmen,  in  granting  Ireland  her 
independence,  were  not  insensible  to  the  difficulties 
difficulties  of  her  future  government ;  and  Jj^^^d- 
endeavoured  to  concert  some  plan  of  union,  ®°^ 
by  which  the  interests  of  the  two  countries  could  be 
secured.^  ]N"o  such  plan,  however,  could  be  devised  ; 
and  for  nearly  twenty  years  the  British  ministers 
were  left  to  solve  the  strange  problem  of  governing 
a  divided  state,  and  bringing  into  harmony  the 
councils  of  two  independent  legislatures.  Its  solu- 
tion was  naturally  found  in  the  continuance  of  cor- 
ruption ;  and  the  Parliament  of  Ireland, — ^having 
gained  its  freedom,  sold  it,  without  compunction,  to 
the  Castle.^  Ireland  was  governed  by  her  native 
legislature,  but  was  not  the  less  imder  the  dominion 
of  a  close  oligarchy, — factious,  turbulent,  exclusive 


'  Fox's  Mem.,  i.  393,  403,  404,  418;  Lord  J.  Eussell's  Life  of 
Fox,  i.  290-295  ;  Grattan's  Life,  ii.  289,  et  seq. ;  Court  and  Cabineta 
of  Geo.  m.,  i.  65. 

2  Address  of  both  Houses  to  the  king,  May  17th,  1782 ;  Corre- 
spondence of  Duke  of  Portland  and  Marquess  of  Eockingham ; 
Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  605.  The  scheme  of  a  union  appears  to  have 
been  discussed  as  early  as  1757. — ^Hardy's  Life  of  Lord  Charlemont, 
i.  107.     And  again  in  1776 ;  ComwaUis  Corr.,  iii.  129. 

'  See  a  curious  analysis  of  the  ministerial  majority,  in  1784,  on 
the  authority  of  the  Bolton  MSS.  Massey's  Hist.,  iii.  264 ;  and 
Speech  of  Mr.  Grattan  on  the  Address,  Jan.  19th,  1792  ;  L-ish 
Deb.,  xii.  6-8;  and  Speech  of  Mr.  Fox,  March  23rd.  1797.  He 
stated  that  *  a  person  of  high  consideration  was  known  to  say  that 
500,000^.  had  been  expend^  to  quell  an  opposition  in  L:eland,  and 
that  as  much  more  must  be  expended  in  order  to  bring  the  legisla- 
ture of  that  country  to  a  proper  temper.' — Pari.  Hist.,  xxxiii.  143  ; 
Speech  of  Mr.  Spring  Rice.  April  23rd,  1834  ;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser., 
xxii.  1189  :  Plowden's  Hist.,  ii.  346,  609. 


3i8  Ireland, 

and  corrupt.  And  how  could  it  be  otherwise  ?  The 
people,  with  arms  in  their  hands,  had  achieved  a 
triumph.  '  Magna  Charta,'  said  Grattan,  '  was  not 
attained  in  Parliament :  but  by  the  barons,  armed 
in  the  field.'  ^  But  what  influence  had  the  people 
at  elections  ?  Disfranchised  and  incapacitated,  they 
could  pretend  to  none !  The  anomalous  condition 
of  the  Parliament  and  people  of  Ireland  became  the 
more  conspicuous,  as  they  proceeded  in  their  new 
functions  of  self-government.  The  volunteers,  not 
Thevoinn-     Satisfied  with  the  achievement  of  national 

teers  demand    .      ,  ,  ,     ,      .  . 

Pariia-         independence,  now  confronted  their  native 

mentary  ^ 

reform.  Parliament  with  demands  for  Parliamen- 
tary reform.^  That  cause  being  discussed  in  the 
English  Parliament,  was  eagerly  caught  up  in  Ire- 
land. Armed  men  organised  a  wide-spread  political 
agitation,  sent  delegates  to  a  national  convention,^ 
and  seemed  prepared  to  enforce  their  arguments  at 
the  point  of  the  bayonet.  Their  attitude  was 
threatening:  but  their  cause  a  hollow  pretence. 
The  enfranchisement  of  Catholics  formed  no  part  of 
their  scheme.  In  order  to  secure  their  assistance, 
in  the  recent  struggle  for  independence,  they  had, 
indeed,  recommended  a  relaxation  of  the  penal  laws  : 
a  common  cause  had  softened  the  intolerance  of 
Protestants  ;  and  some  of  the  most  oppressive  disa- 
bilities of  their  Catholic  brethren  had  been  removed :  * 


»  Irish  Debates,  April  16th,  1782,  i.  335. 

"^  Plowden's  Hist.,  ii.  28  :  Hardy's  Life  of  Lord  Charlemont,  ii. 
93-134;  Grattan's  Life,  iii.  102-146. 

^  Plowden,  ii.  66. 

*  Viz.  in  1778  (17  &  18  Geo.  III.  c.  49,  Ireland),  and  in  1782  ; 
Plowden's  Hist.,  i.  555,  559,  564,  579 ;  and  svjpra,  p.  110. 


Parliamentary  Reform^  1783-84.       319 

but  as  yet  the  patriots  and  volunteers  had  no  inten- 
tion of  extending  to  them  the  least  share  of  civil  or 
political  power. 

Mr.  Flood  was  the  organ  of  the  volunteers  in  the 
House  of  Commons, — a  patriot  second  only  Mr.  riood-s 

„  ..  -1-1.1  motion  for 

to  Mr.  G-rattan  m  influence  and  ability, —  reform, 

•^ '  Nov.  29th, 

and  jealous  of  the  popularity  and  pre-  i783. 
eminence  of  his  great  rival.  In  November  1783, 
he  moved  for  leave  to  bring  in  a  bill,  for  the  more 
equal  representation  of  the  people.  He  was  met  at 
once  with  the  objection  that  his  proposal  originated 
with  an  armed  association,  whose  pretensions  were 
incompatible  with  freedom  of  debate;  and  it  was 
rejected  by  a  large  majority.^ 

Mr.  Flood  renewed  his  efforts  in  the  following 
year :    but   the    country  party  were    dis-  -Renewed, 
united ;  the  owners  of  boroughs  were  de-  J^JJ^^oth, 
termined   not   to   surrender  their  power;  ^^^*' 
the  dictation  of  the  volunteers  gave  just  offence ; 
and  the  division  of   opinion  on  the  admission  of 
Catholics  to  the  franchise  was  becoming  Failure  of 

the  cause  of 

more  pronounced.  Again  his  measure  was  reform. 
rejected.^  The  mob  resented  its  rejection  with  vio- 
lence and  fury :  but  the  great  body  of  the  people, 
whose  rights  were  ignored  by  the  patriots  and  agita- 
tors, regarded  it  with  indifference.  The  armed  agi- 
tation proceeded :  but  the  volunteers  continued  to 
be  divided  upon  the  claims  of  the  Catholics, — to 

'  Ayes,  49 ;  Noes,  158.  Irish  Debates,  ii.  353 ;  Fox's  Mem., 
ii.  165,  186  ;  Grattan's  Life,  iii.  146,  et  seq.;  Hardy's  Life  of  Lord 
Charlemont,  ii.  135. 

2  March  13th,  20th,  1784;  Irish  Deb.,  iii.  13;  Plowden's  Hist,  ii. 
80.     Aves,  85 ;  Noes,  159. 


320  Ireland. 

which  their  leader  Lord  Charlemont  was  himself 
opposed.^  An  armed  Protestant  agitation,  and  a 
packed  council  of  borough  proprietors,  were  un- 
promising instruments  for  reforming  the  representa- 
tion of  the  people.^ 

A  close  and  corrupt  Parliament  was  left  in  fall 
Mr  pitt'8  possession  of  its  power ;  and  Ireland,  exult- 
SSrS^  ing  in  recent  emancipation  from  British 
1785.  txiIq^  was  soon  made  sensible  that  neither 

was  her  commerce  free,  nor  her  independence  assured. 
The  regulation  of  her  commerce  was  beyond  the 
power  of  the  Irish  legislature  :  the  restrictions  under 
which  it  laboured  concerned  both  countries,  and 
needed  the  concert  of  the  two  Parliaments.  Mr. 
Pitt,  wise  and  liberal  in  his  policy  concerning  Ire- 
land, regarded  commercial  freedom  as  essential  to  her 
prosperity  and  contentment ;  and  in  1785,  he  pre- 
pared a  comprehensive  scheme  to  attain  that  object. 
Ireland  had  recently  acquired  the  right  of  trading 
with  Europe  and  the  "West  Indies :  but  was  nearly 
cut  off  from  trade  with  England  herself,  and  with 
America  and  Africa.  Mr.  Pitt  offered  liberal  con- 
cessions on  all  these  points,  which  were  first  sub- 
mitted to  the  Parliament  of  Ireland  in  the  form  of 
eleven  resolutions.^  They  were  gratefully  accepted 
and  acknowledged:  but  when  the  minister  intro- 
duced them  to  the  British  Parliament,  he  was  imable, 


»  Plowden's  History,   ii.    105  ;   Moore's  Life  of  Lord  E.  Fitz- 
gerald, i.  189,  198  ;  Hardy's  Life  of  Lord  Charlemont,  ii.  129. 

2  For  a  list  of  the  proprietors  of  Irish  nomination  boroughs,  see 
Plowden's  Hist.,  ii.  App.  No.  96. 

3  Feb.   7th,   1785;   Lrish  Deb.,  iv.    116;    Plowden's   Hist.,    ii. 
113,  n. 


Mr,  Pitt's  Commei^cial Meas2ires,     321 

in  the  plenitude  of  his  power,  to  overeome  the 
interests  and  jealousy  of  traders,  and  the  ignorance, 
prejudices,  and  faction  of  his  opponents  in  the 
House  of  Commons.  He  was  obliged  to  withdraw 
many  of  the  concessions  he  had  offered, — including 
the  right  of  trading  with  India  and  the  foreign 
A¥est  Indies  ;  and  he  introduced  a  new  proposition, 
requiring  the  English  navigation  laws  to  be  enacted 
by  the  Parliament  of  Ireland.  The  measure,  thus 
changed,  was  received  with  chagrin  and  resentment 
by  the  Parliament  and  people  of  Ireland,  as  at  once 
a  mark  of  English  jealousy  and  injustice,  and  a 
badge  of  Irish  dependence.^  The  resolutions  of  the 
Irish  Parliament  had  been  set  aside, — the  interests 
of  the  country  sacrificed  to  those  of  English  traders, 
—and  the  legislature  was  called  upon  to  register  the 
injurious  edicts  of  the  British  Parliament.  A  mea- 
sure, conceived  in  the  highest  spirit  of  statesman- 
ship, served  but  to  aggravate  the  ill-feelings  w^hich 
it  had  been  designed  to  allay ;  and  was  abandoned, 
in  disappointment  and  disgust.^  Its  failure,  however, 
illustrated  the  difficulties  of  governing  the  realm 
through  the  agency  of  two  independent  Parliaments, 
and  foreshadowed  the  necessity  of  a  legislative 
union.  Another  illustration  of  the  danger  of  divided 
councils  was  afforded,  four  years  afterwards,  by  the 
proceedings  of  the  Irish  Parliament  on  the  regency.^ 

^  Debates,  Feb.  22nd,  and  May  12th,  in  Commons;  Pari.  Hist., 
XXV.  311,  575.     In  Lords,  June  7th;  Ihid.,  820. 

2  Irish  Debates,  v.  329,  &c.  ;  Plowden's  Hist,  ii.  120-136  ;  Tom- 
line's  Life  of  Pitt,  ii.  69-92 ;  Lord  Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt,  i.  263-273 ; 
Beresford  Corr.,  i.  265. 

3  Supra,\ ol.l.  19-1;  Hardy's  Life  of  Lord  Charlemont,  ii,  16S- 
lf,S  ;  Grattun's  Life,  iii.  341,  ct  seq. 

VOL.    III.  Y 


322  Ireland. 

A  few  years  later,  at  a  time  of  peril  and  appre- 
Liberai  liension  in  England,  a  policy  of  concilia- 
of  1792-3.  tion  was  again  adopted  in  Ireland.  The 
years  1792  and  1793  were  signalised  by  the  admis- 
sion of  Catholics  to  the  elective  franchise,  and  to 
civil  and  military  offices,^  the  limitation  of  the  Irish 
pension  list,'^  the  settlement  of  a  fixed  civil  list  upon 
the  crown,  in  lieu  of  its  hereditary  revenues,  the  ex- 
clusion of  some  of  the  swarm  of  placemen  and  pen- 
sioners from  the  House  of  Commons,  and  tlie  adop- 
tion of  Mr.  Fox's  protective  law  of  libel.^  Ireland, 
however,  owed  these  promising  concessions  to  the 
wise  policy  of  Mr.  Pitt  and  other  English  statesmen, 
rather  than  *to  her  native  Parliament.  They  were 
not  yielded  gracefully  by  the  Irish  cabinet,  and  they 
were  accompanied  by  rigorous  measures  of  coercion.'* 
This  was  the  last  hopeful  period  in  the  separate 
history  of  Ireland,  which  was  soon  to  close  in 
tumults,  rebellion,  and  civil  war.  To  the  seething 
elements  of  discord, — social,  religious,  and  political, 
— ^were  now  added  the  perilous  ingredients  of 
revolutionary  sentiments  and  sympathies. 

The  volunteers  had  aimed  at  worthy  objects ;  yet 
The  United    their  associatiou  was  founded  upon  revo- 

Irishmen,         i     .  •  .       .    ,  .  .,  ,  .   , 

1791.  lutionary    principles,    incompatible    with 

constitutional  government.     Clamour  and  complaint 

*  Supra,  p.  110;  Plowden's  Hist,,  ii.  407;  Moore's  Life  of  Lord 
E.  Fitzgerald,  i.  205,  216,  217. 

2  Siipra,  Vol.  I.  259  ;  Plowden's  Hist.,  ii.  146,  188,  279. 

3  Supra,  p.  262. 

*  Plowden's  Hist.,  ii.  471.  In  1805  Mr.  Grattan  stated  that  this 
policy  of  conciliation  originated  with  ministers  in  England;  but 
being  opposed  by  the  ministry  in  Ireland,  its  grace  and  popularity 
were  lost. — Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  iv.  926  ;  Moore's  Life  of  Lord  E. 
Fitzgerald,  i.  218  ;  Hardy's  Life  of  Lord  Charlemont,  ii.  294-300; 
Crrattan's  Life,  iy.  53-114. 


The  United  Irishmen.  323 

are  lawful  in  a  free  state  :  but  the  agitation  of  armed 
men  assumes  the  shape  of  rebellion.  Their  example 
was  followed,  in  1791,  by  the  United  Irishmen, 
whose  original  design  was  no  less  worthy.  This 
association  originated  with  the  Protestants  of  Bel- 
fast ;  and  sought  '  a  complete  reform  of  the  legisla- 
ture, founded  on  the  principles  of  civil,  political, 
and  religious  liberty.'^  These  reasonable  objects 
were  pursued,  for  a  time,  earnestly  and  in  good 
faith ;  and  motions  for  reform,  on  the  broad  basis  of 
religious  equality,  were  submitted  to  the  legislature 
by  ^Ir.  Ponsonby,  where  they  received  ample  dis- 
cussion.2  But  the  association  was  soon  to  be  com- 
promised by  republican  leaders  ;  and  seduced  into 
an  alliance  with  French  Jacobins,  and  a  treasonable 
correspondence  with  the  enemies  of  their  country, 
in  aid  of  Irish  disaffection.^  Treason  took  the  place 
of  patriotism.  This  unhappy  land  was  also  disturbed 
by  armed  and  hostile  associations  of  peasants,  known 
as  '  defenders '  and '  peep-of-day  boys.'  ^  Society  was 
convulsed  with  violence,  agrarian  outrage,  and 
covert  treason. 

»  Plowden's  Hist.,  ii.  330-334,  and  App.,  No.  84;  Eeport  of 
Secret  Committee  of  Lords;  Lords'  Journ.,  Ireland,  vii.  580; 
Madden's  United  Irishmen  ;  Moore's  Life  of  Lord  E.  Fitzgerald,  i. 
197. 

2  March  4th,  1794 ;  May  15th,  1797.     Plowden's  Hist.,  ii.  452,  &c. 

^  In  1795,  the  Irish  Union  Societies  were  formed  out  of  the 
United  Irishmen.  The  correspondence  appears  to  have  commenced 
in  1795. — Plowden's  Hist.,  ii.  667  ;  Eeport  of  Secret  Committee  of 
Commons,  1797  ;  Irish  Debates,  xvii.  522 ;  G-rattan's  Life,  iv.  259, 
&c. ;  Moore's  Life  of  Lord  E.  Fitzgerald,  i.  164-166,  256-260,  273, 
et  seq.,  296 ;  ii.  9,  et  seq. ;  Life  of  Wolfe  Tone,  i.  132-136  ;  ii.  14,  ei 
seq. ;  Eeport  of  Secret  Committee  of  Commons,  Ireland,  1797 ; 
Comm.  Journ.,  Ireland,  xvii.  App.  829 ;  Castlereagh  Corr.,  i.  189, 
296,  366,  &c. ;  Cornwallis  Corr.,  ii.  338. 

*  Plowden's  Hist.,  ii.  335 ;  Moore's  Life  of  Lord  E.  Fitzgerald, 
ii.  6. 

y  2 


324  Ireland. 

Meanwhile,  religious  animosities,  which  had  been 
Fends  be-  partially  allayed  by  the  liberal  policy  of 
testants  the  govemment,  and  by  the  union  of  Pro- 
thoiics.  testants  and  Catholics  in  the  volunteer 
forces,  were  revived  with  increased  intensity.  In 
1795,  Lord  Fitzwilliam's  brief  rule, — designed  for 
conciliation, — merely  raised  the  hopes  of  Catholics, 
and  the  fears  of  Protestants.^  The  peasantry,  by 
whom  the  peace  of  the  country  was  disturbed, 
generally  professed  one  faith  :  the  gentry,  another. 
Traditional  hatred  of  the  Komish  faith  was  readily 
associated,  in  the  minds  of  the  latter,  with  loyalty 
and  the  protection  of  life  and  property.  To  them 
papist  and  'defender'  were  the  same.  Every  social 
disorder  was  ascribed  to  the  hated  religion.  Papist 
enemies  of  order,  and  conspirators  against  their 
country,  were  banded  together;  and  loyal  Protes- 
tants were  invited  to  associate  in  defence  of  life, 
property,  and  religion.  With  this  object.  Orange 
Orange  socioties  wore  rapidly  formed ;  which,  ani- 
societies.  mated  by  fear,  zeal,  and  party  spirit, 
further  inflamed  the  minds  of  Protestants  against 
Catholics.  Nor  was  their  hostility  passive.  In 
September  1795,  a  fierce  conflict  arose  between  the 
Orangemen  and  defenders, — since  known  as  the 
battle  of  the  Diamond, — which  increased  the  in- 
veteracy of  the  two  parties.  Orangemen  en- 
deavoured, by  the  eviction  of  tenants,  the  dismissal 
of  servants,  and  worse  forms  of  persecution,  to 
drive  every  Catholic  out  of  the  county  of  Armagh  ;  ^ 

*  Moore's  Life  of  Lord  E.  Fitzgerald,  i.  260 ;  Grattan's  Life,  iv. 
182  ;  Castlereagh  Corr.,  i,  10. 
2  Speech  of  Mr.Grattau,  Feb.22ud,  1796;  Irish  Pari.  Deb.,  xvi.  107. 


The  Rebellion  of  i^j^^Z. 


O^D 


and  defenders  retaliated  with  murderous  outrages.^ 
In  1796,  the  disturbed  state  of  the  country  was  met 
by  further  measures  of  repression,  which  were 
executed  by  the  magistrates  and  military  with 
merciless  severity, — too  often  unwarranted  by  law.^ 
To  other  causes  of  discontent,  was  added  resentment 
of  oppression  and  injustice.  The  country  was  rent 
asunder  by  hatreds,  strifes,  and  disaffection,  and 
threatened,  from  without,  by  hostile  invasion,  which 
Irish  traitors  had  encouraged.^  At  length  these  evil 
passions,  fomented  by  treason  on  one  side,  and  by 
cruelty  on  the  other,  exploded  in  the  rebellion  of 
1798. 

The  leaders  of  this  rebellion  were  Protestants.'' 
The   Catholic  e-entry  and   priesthood   re-  There- 

1     -,  .1-1-.  1      bellion  of 

coiled  from  any  contact  with  French  i798. 
atheists  and  Jacobins  :  they  were  without  republi- 
can sympathies  ;  but  could  not  fail  to  deplore  the 
sufferings  and  oppression  of  the  wretched  peasantry 
who  professed  their  faith.  The  Protestant  party, 
however, — frantic  with  fear,  bigotry,  and  party 
spirit, — denounced  the  whole  Catholic  body  as  rebels 
and  public  enemies.  The  hideous  scenes  of  this 
rebellion  are  only  to  be  paralleled  by  the.  enormi- 
ties of  the  French  Eevolution.  The  rebels  were 
unloosed  savages, — mad  with  hatred  and  revenge,— 
burning,  destroying  and  slaying :  the  loyalists  and 
military  were   ferocious    and   cruel   beyond  belief. 

»  Speech  of  attorney-general,  Feb.  20th,  1796  ;  Ibid.,  xvi.  102. 

-  Piowden's  Hist.,  ii.  644-o67,  573,  582,  624;  Lord  Moira's 
Speech,  Nov.  22nd,  1797  ;  Pari.  Hist.,  xxxiii.  1058. 

3  Report  of  Secret  Committee  of  Lords,  1798  ;  Lords'  Journ.,  Ire- 
land, viii.  588  ;  Moore's  Life  of  Lord  E.  Fitzgerald,  i.  282. 

*  Piowden's  Hist.,  ii.  700. 


326  Ireland. 

Not  only  were  armed  peasants  hunted  down  like 
wild  beasts  :  but  the  disturbed  districts  were  aban- 
doned to  the  license  of  a  brutal  soldiery.  The 
wretched  '  croppies'  were  scourged,  pitch-capped, 
picketed,  half-hung,  tortured,  mutilated,  and  shot : 
their  homes  rifled  and  burned:  their  wives  and 
daughters  violated  with  revolting  barbarity.^  Before 
the  outbreak  of  the  rebellion,  the  soldiers  had  been 
utterly  demoralised  by  license  and  cruelty,  im- 
checked  by  the  civil  power.^  Sir  Ealph  Aber- 
cromby,  in  a  general  order,  had  declared  '  the  army 
to  be  in  a  state  of  licentiousness,  which  must  render 
it  formidable  to  every  one  but  the  enemy.' ^  In 
vain  had  that  humane  and  enlightened  soldier  at- 
tempted to  restrain  military  excesses.  Thwarted 
by  the  weakness  of  Lord  Camden,  and  the  bigotry 
and  fierce  party  zeal  of  his  cabinet,  he  retired  in 
disgust  from  the  command  of  an  army,  which  had 
been  degraded  into  bands  of  ruffians  and  bandits.'* 
The  troops,  hounded  on  to  renewed  license,  were  fit 
instruments  of  the  infuriated  vengeance  of  the 
ruling  faction. 

In  the  midst  of  these  frightful  scenes.  Lord  Corn- 
Lord  wallis  assiuned  the  civil  and  military  go- 
S?™^^^  vernment  of  Ireland.  Temperate,  sensible, 
lieutenant.     ^^^  humauo,  he  was  horrified  not  less  by  the 

1  Plowden's  Hist,  ii.  701,  705  and  note,  712-714.  It  was  a  fa- 
vourite sport  to  fasten  caps  filled  with  hot  pitch  on  to  the  heads  of 
the  peasants,  or  to  make  them  stand  "upon  a  sharp  stake  or  picket. 
—Ibid.,  713  ;  Moore's  Life  of  Lord  E.  Fitzgerald,  ii.  74,  203.  _ 

2  The  military  had  been  enjoined  by  proclamation  to  act  without 
being  called  upon  by  the  civil  magistrates. — Plowden's  Hist.,  ii.  622, 
App.  civ.  cv. ;  Lord  Dunfermline's  Memoir  of  Sir  Ealph  Aber- 
cromby,  69. 

»  Memoir  of  Sir  Ealph  Abercromby,  93.         ■•  Ihid.,  89-138. 


The  Union  concerted.  327 

atrocities  of  the  rebels,  than  by  the  revolting  cruelty 
and  lawlessness  of  the  troops,  and  the  vindictive 
passions  of  all  concerned  in  the  administration  of 
affairs.^     Moderation   and    humanity  were    to    be 
found    in    none    but    English    regiments.^     With 
native  officers,  rapine  and  murder  were  no  crimes.^ 
.  The  rebellion  was  crushed  :  but  how  was  a  country 
so  convulsed  with  evil  passions  to  be  go-  r^^^  ^^.^^ 
verned  ?     Lord  Cornwallis  found  his  coun-  concerted. 
cil,  or  junto,  at  the  Castle,  by  whom  it  had  long 
been  ruled,  'blinded  by  their  passions  and  preju- 
dices.'    Persuaded  that  the  policy  of  this  party  had 
aggravated   the   political   evils   of  their   wretched 
country,  he  endeavoured  to   save   the   Irish   from 

'  "Writing  June  28th,  1798,  he  said :  *  I  am  much  afraid  that  any 
man  in  a  hrown  coat,  who  is  found  within  several  miles  of  the  field 
of  action,  is  butchered  without  discrimination.' — 'It  shall  be  one  of 
my  first  objects  to  soften  the  ferocity  of  our  troops,  which  I  am 
afraid,  in  the  Irish  corps  at  least,  is  not  confined  to  the  private  sol- 
diers.'— Cornwallis  Corr.,  ii.  355.  Of  the  militia  he  said:  'They 
are  ferocious  and  cruel  in  the  extreme,  when  any  poor  ■wretches, 
either  with  or  without  arms,  come  within  their  power :  in  short, 
murder  appears  to  be  their  favourite  pastime.' — Ibid.,  358.  '  The 
principal  persons  of  this  country,  and  the  members  of  both  Houses 
of  Parliament,  are,  in  general,  averse  to  all  acts  of  clemency  .... 
and  would  pursue  measures  that  could  only  terminate  in  the  extirpa- 
tion of  the  greater  number  of  the  inhabitants,  and  in  the  utter  de- 
struction of  the  country.' — Ibid.,  358.  Again,  he  deplores  'the 
numberless  murders  that  are  hourly  committed  by  our  people  with- 
out any  process  or  examination  whatever.'  '  The  conversation  of  the 
principal  persons  of  the  country  tends  to  encourage  this  system  of 
blood ;  and  the  conversation,  even  at  my  table,  where  you  may  well 
suppose  I  do  all  I  can  to  prevent  it,  always  turns  on  hanging,  shoot- 
ing, burning,  &c.  &c. ;  and  if  a  priest  has  been  put  to  death,  the 
greatest  joy  is  expressed  by  the  whole  company.' — Ibid.,  369. 

-  In  sending  the  100th  Regiment  and  '  some  troops  that  can  be 
depended  upon,'  he  wrote :  *  The  shocking  barbarities  of  our  national 
troops  would  be  more  likely  to  provoke  rebellion  than  to  suppress 
\t:—I}jid.,  377.  See  also  his  General  Order,  Aug.  31st,  1798.— 
Ibid.,  395. 

3  E.g.  the  murder  of  Dogherty. — Md.,  420.  See  also  Lord  Hol- 
land's Mem.,  i.  105-114. 


328  Ireland. 

themselves,  by  that  sclieme  of  union  wMch  a  greater 
statesman  than  himself  had  long  since  conceived.^ 
Under  the  old  system  of  government,  concessions, 
conciliation,  and  justice  were  impracticable.^  The 
only  hope  of  toleration  and  equity  was  to  be  found 
in  the  mild  and  impartial  rule  of  British  statesmen, 
and  an  united  Parliament.  In  this  spirit  was  the 
union  sought  by  Mr.  Pitt,  who  '  resented  and  spurned 
the  bigoted  fury  of  Irish  Protestants  ;'^  in  this 
spirit  was  it  promoted  by  Lord  Cornwallis.'*  Self- 
government  had  become  impossible.  '  If  ever  there 
was  a  country,'  said  Lord  Hutchinson,  '  unfit  to 
govern  itself,  it  is  Ireland  ;  a  corrupt  aristocracy,  a 
ferocious  commonalty,  a  distracted  government,  a 
divided  people.'^  Imperial  considerations,  no  less 
paramount,  also  pointed  to  the  union.  Not  only 
had  the  divisions  of  the  Irish  people  rendered  the 
difficulties  of  internal  administration  insuperable : 
but  they  had  proved  a  source  of  weakness  and 
danger  from  without.  Ireland  could  no  longer  be 
suffered  to  continue  a  separate  realm:  but  must 
be  fused  and  welded  into  one  state,  with  Great 
Britain. 

But  the  difficulties  of  this  great  scheme  were  not 
Difficulties  ^^sily  to  be  overcome.  However  desirable, 
ing^the*^"  ^^^  ^^&^  necessary,  for  the  interests  of 
Union.  Ireland  herself,  an  invitation  to  surrender 
her  independence, — so  recently  acquired, — deeply 
affected  her  national  sensibilities.     To  be  merged 

»  Cornwallis  Corr.,  ii.  404,  405.  -  Ibid.,  414,  415,  41G. 

3  Wilberforce's  Diary,  July  IGtli,  1798. 

<  Cornwallis  Corr.,  i'i.  418.  419,  &e. ;  Castlereagli  Corr.,  i.  442. 
^  Memoir  of  Sir  Ralph  Abercromby,  136. 


Objections  of  the  Ruling  Party.       329 

in  the  greater  and  raore  powerful  kingdom,  was  to 
lose  her  distinct  nationality.  And  how  could  she 
be  assured  against  neglect  and  oppression,  when 
wholly  at  the  mercy  of  the  Parliament  of  Grreat 
Britain,  whose  sovereigTity  she  had  lately  re- 
nounced ?  The  liberties  she  had  won  in  1782, 
were  all  to  be  forfeited  and  abandoned.  At  any 
other  time,  these  national  feelings  alone  would 
have  made  an  union  impossible.  But  the  country, 
desolated  by  a  war  of  classes  and  religions,  had  not 
yet  recovered  the  united  sentiments  of  a  nation. 

But  other  difficulties,  no  less  formidable,  were  to 
be  encountered.     The  Irish  party  were  in-  objections 
vited  to  yield  up  the  power  and  patronage  J^J^^ 
of  the  Castle  :  the  peers  to  surrender  their  ^^^' 
proud  position  as  hereditary  councillors,  in  Parlia- 
ment :  the  great  families  to  abandon  their  boroughs. 
The  compact  confederacy  of  interests  and  corruption 
was  to  be  broken  up.^     But  the  government,  con- 
vinced of  the  necessity  of  the  Union,  was  prepared 
to  overcome  every  obstacle. 

The  Parliament  of  Great  Britain  recognised  the 

1  There  are  two  classes  of  men  in  Parliament,  whom  the  disasters 
and  sufferings  of  the  country  have  but  very  imperfectly  awakened  to 
the  necessity  of  a  change,  viz.  the  borough  proprietors,  and  the  im- 
mediate agents  of  government.' — Lord  Cornwallis  to  Duke  of  Port- 
land, Jan.  5th,  1799;  Corr.,  iii.  31.  Again:  'There  certainly  is  a 
very  strong  disinclination  to  the  measure  in  many  of  the  borough 
proprietors,  and  a  not  less  marked  repugnance  in  many  of  the  official 
people,  particularly  in  those  who  have  been  longest  in  the  habits  of 
the  current  system.' — Same  to  same,  Jan.  11th,  1799  ;  Ibid.,  34.  And 
much  later  in  the  struggle,  his  lordship  wrote  :  'The  nearer  the  great 
event  approaches,  the  more  are  the  needy  and  interested  senators 
alarmed  at  the  effects  it  may  possibly  have  on  their  interests,  and  the 
provision  for  their  families  ;  and  I  believe  that  half  of  our  majority 
would  bo  at  least  as  much  delighted  as  any  of  our  opponents,  if  the 
measure  could  be  defeated.' — Ibid.,  228. 


330  Irelmid. 

Union  as  a  necessary  measure  of  state  policy ;  and 
Means  by  the  mastcrly  arguments  of  Mr.  Pitt^ 
Union  was  admitted  of  little  resistance.^  But  the 
pushed.  first  proposal  to  the  Irish  Parliament  mis- 
carried; an  amendment  in  favour  of  maintaining 
an  independent  legislatm-e  being  lost  by  a  single 
vote.^  It  was  plain  that  corrupt  interests  could 
only  be  overcome  by  corruption.  Nomination 
boroughs  must  be  bought,  and  their  members  in- 
demnified,— county  interests  conciliated, — ofl&cers 
and  expectant  lawyers  compensated, — opponents 
bribed.  Lord  Castlereagh  estimated  the  cost  of 
these  expedients  at  a  million  and  a  half;  and  the 
price  was  forthcoming.'*  The  purchase  of  boroughs 
was  no  new  scheme,  having  been  proposed  by  Mr. 
Pitt  himself,  as  the  basis  of  his  measm*e  of  Parlia- 
mentary reform  in  1785  ;^  and  now  it  was  systema- 
tically carried  out  in  Ireland.'  The  patrons  of 
boroughs  received  7,500^.  for  each  seat ;  and  eighty- 
four   boroughs   were   disfranchised.^     Lord   Down- 

»  Jan.  23rd  and  31st,  1799. 

2  In  the  Commons,  his  resolutions  were  carried  by  149  votes 
against  24,  and  in  the  Lords  without  a  division. — Plowdeu's  Hist., 
ii.  896. 

=»  Jan.  22nd,  1799.  Ayes,  106 ;  Noes,  105.— Cornwallis  Corr.,  iii. 
40-51. 

*  Castlereagh  Corr.,  ii.  151.  His  lordship  divided  the  cost  as  fol- 
lows : — Boroughs,  756,000^. ;  county  interests,  224,000^. ;  barristers, 
200,000/;.;  purchasers  of  seats,  75,000^.;  Dublin,  200,000^.:  total, 
1,433,000^. — Cornwallis  Corr.,  iii.  81 ;  Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt,  iii. 
180.  Lord  Cornwallis  wrote,  July  1st,  1799:  'There  cannot  be  a 
stronger  argument  for  the  measure  than  the  overgr'^wn  Parliament- 
ary power  of  five  or  six  of  our  pampered  borough -mongers,  who  are 
become  most  formidable  to  government,  by  their  long  possession  of 
the  entire  patronage  of  the  crown,  in  their  respective  districts.' — 
Corr.,  iii.  110.  ^  Swpra,  Vol.  L,  400. 

^  Of  the  34  boroughs  retained,  nine  only  were  open. — Cornwallis 
Corr.,  iii.  234,  324.  See  list  of  boroughs  disfranchised  and  sums 
paid  to  proprietors. — Ihid.^  321-324.    The  Ponsonbys  exercised  in- 


Afeans  by  which  Union  ivas  acco7nplished.  3 


sliire  was  paid  52,500^.  for  seven  seats ;  Lord  Ely, 
45,000^.  for  six.^  The  total  compensation  amounted 
to  1,260,000^.^  Peers  were  further  compensated 
for  the  loss  of  their  privileges  in  the  national  coun- 
cil, by  profuse  promises  of  English  peerages,  or 
promotion  in  the  peerage  of  Ireland:  commoners 
were  conciliated  by  new  honours,^  and  by  the 
largesses  of  the  British  government.  Places  were 
given  or  promised, — pensions  multiplied, — secret- 
service  money  exhausted.^  In  vain  Lord  Corn- 
wallis  complained  of  the  'political  jobbing'  and 
'  dirty  business'  in  which  he  was  '  involved  beyond 
all  bearing,'  and  « longed  to  kick  those  whom  his 
public  duty  obliged  him  to  court.'  In  vain  he 
'despised  and  hated  himself,'  while  'negotiating 
and  jobbing  with  the  most  coiTupt  people  under 
heaven.'^     British   gold   was   sent   for   and   distri- 

fluence  over  22  seats ;  Lord  Downshire  and  the  Beresfords,  respec- 
tively, over  nearly  as  many.  23  of  the  34  boroughs  remained  close 
until  the  Reform  Act  of  ISS2.— Ibid.,  324.  Many  of  the  counties 
also  continued  in  the  hands  of  the  great  families. — Ibid. ;  and  see 
supra,  "Vol.  I.  360. 

»  Plowden's  Hist.,  ii.  1018,  1067;  Castlereagh  Corr.,  iii.  56-67; 
Cornwallis  Corr.,  iii.  324  ;  Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt,  iii.  227. 

2  Cornwallis  Corr.,  iii.  323. 

3  Castlereagh  Corr.,  iii.  330 ;  Cornwallis  Corr.,  iii.  244,  252,  257, 
262.  29  Irish  peerages  were  created,  of  which  seven  were  uncon- 
nected with  the  Union  ;  20  Irish  peers  were  promoted,  and  6  English 
peerages  granted  for  Irish  services. — 3id.,  318.  See  also  Lord  Stan- 
hope's Life  of  Pitt,  iii.  180. 

■*  Cornwallis  Corr.,  iii.  278,  340  ;  Grattan's  Life,  v.  iii. 

^  Cornwallis  Corr.,  iii.  102.  The  luckless  viceroy  applied  to  him- 
self the  appropriate  lines  of  Swift : — 

'  So  to  effect  his  monarch's  ends. 
From  hell  a  viceroy  devil  ascends  : 
His  budget  with  corruption  cramm'd — 
The  contributions  of  the  damn'd — 
AVhich  with  unsparing  hand  he  strows 
Through  courts  and  senates,  as  he  goes ; 
And  then,  at  Beelzebub's  black  hall, 
Complains  his  budget  is  too  small.' 


332  l7^eland. 

buted;^  and,  at  length, — in  defiance  of  threats  of 
armed  resistance,^ — in  spite  of  insidious  promises 
of  relief  to  Catholics,^ — and  corrupt  defection  among 
the  supporters  of  government,'* — the  cause  was  won. 
A  great  end  was  compassed  by  means  the  most  base 
and  shameless.  Grrattan,  Lord  Charlemont,  Pon- 
sonby,  Plunket,  and  a  few  patriots  continued  to 
protest  against  the  sale  of  the  liberties  and  free  con- 
stitution of  Ireland.  Their  eloquence  and  public 
virtue  command  the  respect  of  posterity :  but  the 
wretched  history  of  their  country  denies  them  its 
sympathy.^ 

The  terms  of  the  Union  were  now  speedily  ad- 
Terms  of  justed  and  ratified  by  the  Parliaments  of 
the  Union.  ^^^^  couutries.®  Ireland  was  to  be  repre- 
sented, in  the  Parliament  of  the  United  Kingdom, 
by  four  spiritual  lords,  sitting  by  rotation  of  sessions ; 
by  twenty-eight  temporal  peers,  elected  for  life  by 
the  Irish  peerage ;  and  by  a  hundred  members  of 
the  House   of  Commons.      Her  commerce   was   at 


'  Cornwallis  Corr.,  iii.  151,  156,  201,  202,  226,  309;  Coote's  Hist, 
of  the  Union. 

2  Ibid.,  167,  180. 

'  Ibid.,  51,  bb,  63,  149  ;  Castlereagh  Corr.,  ii.  45,  et  supra,  p. 
116. 

*  'Sir  E.  Butler,  Mahon,  and  Fetherstone  were  taken  off  by 
county  cabals  during  the  recess,  and  Whaley  absolutely  bought  by 
the  Opposition  stock  purse.  He  received,  I  understand,  2,000^.  down, 
and  is  to  receive  as  much  more  after  the  service  is  performed.  We 
have  undoubted  proofs,  though  not  such  as  we  can  disclose,  that 
they  are  enabled  to  offer  as  high  as  5,000/.  for  an  individual  vote, 
and  I  lament  to  state  that  there  are  individuals  remaining  amongst 
lis  that  are  likely  to  yield  to  this  temptation.' — Lord  Castlereagh  to 
Duke  of  Portland,  Feb.  7th,  1800;  Cornwallis  Corr.,  iii.  182.  '  The 
enemy,  to  my  certain  knowledge,  offer  5,000/.  ready  money  for  a 
vote.' — Lord  Cornwallis  to  Bishop  of  Lichfield  ;  Ibid.,  184. 

*  Grattan's  Life.  v.  17,  ft  seq.  ;  75-180. 

'^  39  &  40  Geo.  III.  c.  67  ;  40  Geo.  III.  c.  38.     (Ireland.) 


Resttlts  of  the  Union.  333 

length  admitted  to  a  freedom  which,  under  ether 
conditions,  could  not  have  been  attained.* 

Such  was  the  incorporation  of  the  two  countries ; 
and  henceforth  the  history  of  Ireland  be-  j^gsnitgof 
came  the  history  of  England.  Had  Mr.  ^^^  union. 
Pitt's  liberal  and  enlightened  policy  been  carried 
out,  the  Catholics  of  Ireland  would  have  been  at 
once  admitted  to  a  participation  in  the  privileges  of 
the  constitution :  provision  would  have  been  made 
for  their  clergy;  and  the  grievances  of  the  tithe 
system  would  have  been  redressed.^  But  we  have 
seen  how  his  statesmanship  was  overborne  by  the 
scruples  of  the  king ;  ^  and  how  long  and  arduous 
was  the  struggle  by  which  religious  liberty  was  won. 
The  Irish  were  denied  those  rights  which  English 
statesmen  had  designed  for  them.  Nor  was  this  the 
worst  evil  which  followed  the  fall  of  Mr.  Pitt,  and 
the  reversal  of  his  policy.  So  long  as  narrow  Tory 
principles  prevailed  in  the  councils  of  England,  the 
aovernment  of  Ireland  was  confided  to  the  kindred 
party  at  the  Castle.  Protestant  ascendency  was 
maintained  as  rigorously  as  ever:  Catholics  were 
governed  by  Orangemen :  the  close  oligarchy  which 
had  ruled  Ireland  before  the  Union  was  still  abso- 
lute. Eepression  and  coercion  continued  to  be  the 
principles  of  its  harsh  domination.'*     The  represen- 


•  39  &  40  Geo.  III.  c.  67. 

-  Letter  of  Mr.  Pitt,  Nov.  17th,  1798;  ComTrallis  Corr.,  ii.  440; 
Lord  Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt,  iii.  160. 
3  Vol.  I.  92  ;  and  supra,  p.  118. 

*  Lord  Cornwallis  had  foreseen  this  evil.  He  wrote,  May  1st, 
1800:  'If  a  successor  -were  to  be  appointed  who  should,  as  almost 
all  former  lords-lieutenants  have  done,  throw  himself  into  the  hands 
of  this  party,  no  advantage  would  be  derived  from  the  Union.' — 


334  Ireland. 

tation  of  Ireland,  in  the  United  Parliament,  con- 
tinued in  the  hands  of  the  same  party,  who  supported 
Tory  ministers,  and  encouraged  them  to  resist  every 
concession  which  more  liberal  statesmen  proposed. 
Potitical  liberties  and  equality  were  withheld ;  yet 
the  superior  moderation  and  enlightenment  of  Bri- 
tish statesmen  secured  a  more  equitable  administra- 
tion of  the  laws,  and  much  remedial  legislation, — 
designed  for  the  improvement  of  the  social  and 
material  condition  of  the  people.  These  men  ear- 
nestly strove  to  govern  Ireland  well,  within  the 
range  of  their  narrow  principles.  The  few  restric- 
tions which  the  Union  had  still  left  upon  her  com- 
merce were  removed  ;  ^  her  laws  were  reviewed,  and 
their  administration  amended ;  her  taxation  was 
lightened  ;  the  education  of  her  people  encouraged ; 
her  prosperity  stimulated  by  public  works.  Despite 
of  insufficient  capital  and  social  distm-bance,  her 
trade,  shipping,  and  manufactures  expanded  with 
her  freedom.^ 

At  length,  after  thirty  years,  the  people  of  Ireland 

Corr.,  iii.  237.  Again,  Dec.  1st,  1800:  *  They  assert  that  the  Catho- 
lics of  Ireland  (seven-tenths  of  the  population  of  the  country)  never 
can  he  good  subjects  to  a  Protestant  government.  What  then  have 
^vo  dore,  if  this  position  be  true  ?  We  have  united  ourselves  to  a 
l)3ople  whom  we  ought,  in  policy,  to  have  destroyed.' — Ihid.,  307. 
Again,  Feb.  15th,  1801 :  'No  consideration  could  induce  me  to  take 
a  responsible  part  with  any  administration  who  can  be  so  blind  to 
the  interest,  and  indeed  to  the  immediate  security,  of  their  country, 
as  to  persevere  in  the  old  system  of  proscription  and  exclusion  in 
Ireland.'— /6i(f.,  337. 

'  Corn  trade,  46  Geo.  III.  c.  97 ;  Countervailing  Duties,  4  Geo. 
IV.  c.  72 ;  Butter  trade,  8  Geo.  IV.  c.  61 ;  9  Geo.  IV.  c.  88. 

-  See  Debate  on  Eepeal  of  the  Union,  April  1834,  and  especially 
Ml'.  Spring  Eice's  able  and  elaborate  speech. — Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser., 
xxii.  1092,  ct  seg.  Martin's  Ireland  before  and  after  the  Union, 
3rd  ed.,  pref.,  and  chap.  ii.  iii.  &c. 


Irish  Liberties  secured. 


OJD 


were     admitted    to    the    rights    of  citizens.      The 
Catholic  Eelief  Act  was  speedily  followed  ^^.j^^ 
by  an  amendment  of  the  representation;  SSV 
and  from  that  time,  the  spirit  of  freedom  Jctfand 
and  equality  has  animated  the  administra-  ^^''^^^ 
tion  of  Irish  affairs.     The  party  of  Protestant  ascen- 
dency was  finally  overthrown ;  and  rulers  pledged  to 
a  more  liberal  policy,  guided  the  councils  of  the 
state.     Ireland  shared  with  England  every  extension 
of  popular  rights.     The  full  development   of  her 
liberties,  however,  was  retarded  by  the  factious  vio- 
lence of  parties, — by  the  divisions  of  Orangemen 
and  repealers, — by  old  religious  hatreds, — by  social 
feuds  and  agrarian  outrages ;  and  by  the  wretched- 
ness of  a  population   constantly  in  excess  of  the 
means  of  employment.     The  frightful  visi-  r^^  j^..^^^ 
tation  of  famine  in  1846,  succeeded  by  an  ^^™"i^- 
unparalleled  emigration,  swept  from  the  Irish  soil 
more  than  a  fourth  of  its  people.^     Their  sufferings 
were  generously  relieved  by  England  ;  and,  grievous 
as  they  were,  the  hand   of  Grod   wrought   greater 
blessings  for  the  survivors,  than  any  legislation  of 
man  could  have  accomplished. 

In  the  midst  of  all  discouragements, — in  spite  of 
clamours   and   misrepresentation, — in  de-  Freedom  and 

.  .  equality  of 

fiance  of  hostile  factions, — the  executive  Ireland. 
and  the  legislature  have  nobly  striven  to  effect  the 
23olitical  and  social  regeneration  of  Ireland.     The 
great  English  parties  have  honourably  vied  with  one 

'  In  the  ten  years,  from  1841  to  1851,  it  had  decreased  from 
8,17o,124  to  6,552,385,  or  19-85  per  cent.  The  total  loss,  however, 
was  computed  at  2,466,414.  The  decrease  amounted  to  49  persons 
to  every  square  mile. — Census  Report,  1851. 


■2  26  Irehiid. 


xjyj 


another,  in  carrying  out  this  policy.  Eemedial 
legislation  for  Ireland,  and  the  administration  of 
her  affairs,  have,  at  some  periods,  engrossed  more 
attention  than  the  whole  British  Empire.  Ancient 
feuds  have  yet  to  be  extinguished,  and  religious 
divisions  healed :  but  nothing  has  been  wanting 
that  the  wisdom  and  beneficence  of  the  state  could 
devise  for  insuring  freedom,  equal  justice,  and  the 
privileges  of  the  constitution,  to  every  class  of  the 
Irish  people.  Good  laws  have  been  well  adminis- 
tered :  franchises  have  been  recognised  as  rights, — 
not  admitted  as  pretences.  Equality  has  been  not  a 
legal  theory,  but  an  unquestioned  fact.  We  have 
seen  how  Catholics  were  excluded  from  all  the  rights 
of  citizens.  What  is  now  their  position  ?  In  1860, 
of  the  twelve  judges  on  the  Irish  bench,  eight  were 
Catholics.^  In  the  southern  counties  of  Ireland, 
Catholic  gentlemen  have  been  selected,  in  prefe- 
rence to  Protestants,  to  serve  the  office  of  sheriff, 
in  order  to  insure  confidence  in  the  administration 
of  justice.  England  has  also  freely  opened  to  the 
sons  of  Ireland  the  glittering  ambition  of  arms,  of 
statesmanship,  of  diplomacy,  of  forensic  honom-. 
The  names  of  Wellington,  Castlereagh,  and  Palmer- 
ston  attest  that  the  highest  places  in  the  state  may 
be  won  by  Irish  genius. 

The  number  of  distinguished  Irishmen  who  have 
been  added  to  the  roll  of  British  peers,  proves  with 
what  welcome  the  incorporation  of  the  sister  king- 
dom has  been  accepted.     Nor  have  other  dig-nities 

*  Sir  Michael  O'Loghlen  was  the  first  Catholic  promoted  to  the 
bench,  as  Master  of  the  Eolls. — Grrattan's  Life,  i.  66. 


Fruits  of  the  Union.  337 

been  less  freely  dispensed  to  the  honourable  ambition 
of  their  countrymen.  One  illustration  will  sufl&ce. 
In  1860,  of  the  fifteen  judges  on  the  English  bench, 
no  less  than  four  were  Irishmen.^  Freedom,  equa- 
lity, and  honour  have  been  the  fruits  of  the  Union ; 
and  Ireland  has  exchanged  an  enslaved  nationality, 
for  a  glorious  incorporation  with  the  first  empire  of 
the  world. 

*  Viz.,  Mr.  Justice  Willes,  Mr.  Justice  Keating,  Mr.  Justice  Hill, 
and  Baron  Martin ;  to  whom  has  since  been  added  Mr.  Justice  Shee 
an  Irishman  and  a  Catholic. 


VOL.  III. 


338  Colonies, 


CHAPTEE  XVII. 

FREE   CONSTITUTIONS  OF  BEITISH  COLONIES  : — SOTEEEIGNTT  OF  ENG- 

lAND  : — COMMERCIAIi  BESTEICTIONS  : TAXATION  OF  THE  AMBEICAN 

colonies: — THEIB    EESTSTANCE  AND   SEPARATION  :  —  CECWN    COLO- 
NIES:  CANADA: — AUSTRALIA:— COLONIAL  ADMINISTRATION  AFTER 

THE   AMERICAN  "WAR: NEW  COMMERCIAL  POLICY  AFFECTING   THE 

COLONIES  :  —  RESPONSIBLB   GOVERNMENT  : — DEMOCRATIC    COLONIAL 
CONSTITUTIONS : — INDIA. 

It  has  been  the  destiny  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  race  to 
Colonists       spread  through  every  quarter  of  the  globe 

have  borne       , ,      .  it  . ,     .         . 

with  them     their  courage  and  endurance,  their  vigor- 

thelawsof  .     -,       ,  i     n     •      i 

England.  ous  ludustry,  and  their  love  of  freedom. 
Wherever  they  have  founded  colonies  they  have 
borne  with  them  the  laws  and  institutions  of  Eng- 
land, as  their  birthright,  so  far  as  they  were  applic- 
able to  an  infant  settlement.^  In  territories  acquired 
by  conquest  or  cession,  the  existing  laws  and  customs 
of  the  people  were  respected,  until  they  were  quali- 
fied to  share  the  franchises  of  Englishmen.  Some 
of  these, — held  only  as  garrisons, — others  peopled 
with  races  hostile  to  our  rule,  or  unfitted  for  freedom, 
— ^were  necessarily  governed  upon  difierent  princi- 
ples. But  in  quitting  the  soil  of  England  to  settle 
new  colonies.  Englishmen  never  renounced  her  free- 
dom.    Such  being  the  noble  principle  of  English 

^  Blackstx)ne's  Comm.,  i.  107 ;  Lord  Mansfield's  Judgment  in 
Campbell  v.  Hall;  Howell's  St.  Tr.,  xx.  289  ;  Clark's  Colonial  Law, 
9,  139.  181,  &e. ;  Sir  C  C.  Lewis  on  the  Government  of  Dependen- 
cies, 189-203,  308;  Mills'  Colonial  Constitutions,  18. 


Form  of  Colonial  Cons titutio7is.        339 

colonisation,  circumstances  favoured  the  early  de- 
velopment of  colonial  liberties.  The  Puritans,  who 
founded  the  New  England  colonies,  having  fled  from 
the  oppression  of  Charles  I.,  carried  with  them  a 
stern  love  of  civil  liberty,  and  established  republican 
institutions.^  The  persecuted  Catholics  who  settled 
Maryland,  and  the  proscribed  Quakers  who  took 
refuge  in  Pennsylvania,  were  little  less  democratic.^ 
Other  colonies  founded  in  America  and  the  West 
Indies,  in  the  seventeenth  century,  merely  for  the 
purposes  of  trade  and  cultivation,  adopted  institu- 
tions,— ^less  democratic,  indeed,  but  founded  on 
principles  of  freedom  and  self-government.^ 
Whether  established  as  proprietary  colonies,  or 
under  charters  held  direct  from  the  crown,  the 
colonists  were  equally  free. 

The  English  constitution  was  generally  the  type 
of  these  colonial  governments.     The  gover-  ordinary 
nor   was   the   viceroy  of   the  crown :  the  coiomai 
legislative    council,    or    upper    chamber,  tions. 
appointed  by  the  governor,  assumed  the  place  of  the 
House  of  Lords;  and  the  representative  assembly, 
chosen  by  the  people,  was  the  express  image  of  the 
House   of  Commons.     This  miniatm*e  Parliament, 
complete  in  all  its  parts,  made  laws  for  the  internal 
government  of  the  colony.     The  governor  assembled, 
prorogTied,  and  dissolved  it ;  and  signified  his  assent 

^  In  three  of  their  colonies  the  council  was  elective ;  in  Connecti- 
cut and  Ehode  Island  the  colonists  also  chose  their  governor. — Adam 
Smith,  book  iv.  ch.  7.  But  the  king's  approval  of  the  governor  was 
reserved  by  7  &  8  Will.  III.  c.  22.    _ 

2  Bancroft's  Hist,  of  the  Colonisation  of  the  United  States,  i.  264  ; 
iii.  394. 

'  Merivale's  Colonisation,  ed.  1S61,  95,  103. 
z  2 


340  Colonies. 

or  dissent  to  every  act  agreed  to  by  the  chambers  : 
the  Upper  House  mimicked  the  dignity  of  the  House 
of  Peers ;  ^  and  the  Lower  House  insisted  on  the 
privileges  of  the  Commons,  especially  that  of 
originating  alb  taxes  and  grants  of  money,  for  the 
public  service.*  The  elections  were  also  conducted 
after  the  fashion  of  the  mother  country.^  Other 
laws  and  institutions  were  imitated  not  less  faithfully. 
Jamaica,  for  example,  maintained  a  court  of  king's 
bench,  a  court  of  common  pleas,  a  court  of  exchequer, 
a  court  of  chancery,  a  court  of  admiralty,  and  a 
court  of  probate.  It  had  grand  and  petty  juries, 
justices  of  the  peace,  courts  of  quarter-sessions, 
vestries,  a  coroner,  and  constables.'* 

Every  colony  was  a  little  state,  complete  in  its 
The  sove-  legislature,  its  judicature,  and  its  executive 
England.  administration.  But,  at  the  same  time,  it 
acknowledged  the  sovereignty  of  the  mother  country, 
the  prerogatives  of  the  crown,  and  the  legislative 
supremacy  of  Parliament.  The  assent  of  the  king, 
or  his  representative,  was  required  to  give  validity 
to  acts  of  the  colonial  legislature  :  his  veto  annulled 
them  ;  ^  while  the  Imperial  Parliament  was  able  to 

*  In  1858  a  quarrel  arose  between  the  t-veo  Houses  in  J^Tewfound- 
land,  in  consequence  of  the  Upper  House  insisting  upon  receiving 
the  Lower  House  at  a  conference,  sitting  and  covered, — an  assump- 
tion of  dignity  which  was  resented  by  the  latter.  The  governor 
having  failed  to  accommodate  the  difference,  prorogued  the  Parlia- 
ment before  the  supplies  were  granted.  In  the  next  session  these 
disputes  were  amicably  arranged.  Message  of  Council,  April  23rd, 
1858,  and  reply  of  House  of  Assembly ;  Private  Correspondence  of 
Sir  A.  Bannerman. ' 

2  Stokes'  British  ColoFnies,  241 ;  Edwards'  Hist,  of  the  "West  In- 
dies, ii.  419  ;  Long's  Hist,  of  Jamaica,  i.  66. 

'  Edwards,  ii.  419 ;  Haliburton's  Nova  Scotia,  ii.  319. 

*  Long's  Hist,  of  Jamaica,  i.  9. 

^  In  Connecticut  and  Ehode  Island,  neither  the  crown  nor  the 
governor  were  able  to  negative  laws  passed  by  the  Assemblies. 


Commercial  Restrictions.  341 

bind  the  colony  by  its  acts,  and  to  supersede  all 
local  legislation.  Every  colonial  judicature  was 
also  subject  to  an  appeal  to  the  king  in  council,  at 
Westminster.  The  dependence  of  the  colonies, 
however,  was  little  felt  in  their  internal  government. 
They  were  secured  from  interference  by  the  remote- 
ness of  the  mother  country,^  and  the  ignorance,  in- 
difference, and  preoccupation  of  her  rulers.  In 
matters  of  imperial  concern,  England  imposed  her 
own  policy :  but  otherwise  left  them  free.  Asking 
no  aid  of  her,  they  escaped  her  domination.  All 
their  expenditure,  civil  and  military,  was  defrayed 
by  taxes  raised  by  themselves.  They  provided  for 
their  own  defence  against  the  Indians,  and  the 
enemies  of  England.  During  the  seven  years'  war, 
the  American  colonies  maintained  a  force  of  25,000 
men,  at  a  cost  of  several  millions.  In  the  words  of 
Franklin,  'they  were  governed,  at  the  expense  to 
Grreat  Britain,  of  only  a  little  pen,  ink  and  paper  : 
they  were  led  by  a  thread.'  ^ 

But  little  as  the  mother  country  concerned  herself 
in  the  political  government  of  her  colonies,  commercial 
she  evinced  a  jealous  vigilance  in  regard  to  'restrictions. 
their  commerce.  Commercial  monopoly,  indeed,  was 
the  first  principle  in  the  colonial  policy  of  England, 
as  well  as  of  the  other  maritime  states  of  Europe. 
She  suffered  no  other  country  but  herself  to  supply 
their  wants  :  she  appropriated  many  of  their  exports ; 

'  *  Three  thousand  miles  of  ocean  lie  between  you  and  them,'  said 
Mr.  Burke.  '  No  contrivance  can  prevent  the  effect  of  this  distance 
in  weakening  government.'  Adam  Smith  observed :  '  Their  situation 
has  placed  them  less  in  the  view  and  less  in  the  power  of  the  mother 
country.' — Book  iv.  ch.  7. 

2  EWdence  before  the  Commons,  1766;  Pari.  Hist.,  xvi.  139-141. 


342  Colonies. 

and,  for  the  sake  of  her  own  manufacturers,  insisted 
that  their  produce  should  be  sent  to  her  in  a  raw, 
or  unmanufactured  state.  By  the  Navigation  ActSy 
their  produce  could  only  be  exported  to  England  in 
English  ships. ^  This  policy  was  avowedly  maintained 
for  the  benefit  of  the  mother  country, — for  the  en- 
couragement of  her  commerce,  her  shipping,  and 
manufactures, — to  which  the  interests  of  the  colonies 
were  sacrificed.^  But,  in  compensation  for  this 
monopoly,  she  gave  a  preference  to  the  produce  of 
her  own  colonies,  by  protective  and  prohibitory 
duties  upon  foreign  commodities.  In  claiming  a 
monopoly  of  their  markets,  she,  at  the  same  time, 
gave  them  a  reciprocal  monopoly  of  her  own.  In 
some  cases  she  encouraged  the  production  of  their 
staples  by  bounties.  A  commercial  policy  so  artifi- 
cial as  this, — ^the  creature  of  laws  striving  against 
nature, — marked  the  dependence  of  the  colonies, 
crippled  their  industry,  fomented  discontents,  and 
even  provoked  war  with  foreign  states.^  But  it  was 
a  policy  common  to  every  European  government, 
until  enlightened  by  economical  science  ;  and  com- 
mercial advantages  were,  for  upwards  of  a  century, 
nearly  the  sole  benefit  which  England  recognised  in 
the  possession  of  her  colonies.* 

In  all  ages,  taxes  and  tribute  had  been  character- 
Taxes  and  istic  incidents  of  a  dependency.  The  sub- 
common  to  ject  provinces  of  Asiatic  monarchies,  in 
encies.  aucicnt  and  modern  times,  had  been  des- 

*  The  first  Navigation  Act  was  passed  in  1651,  during  the  Com- 
monwealth ;  Merivale,  75,  84,  89 ;  Adam  Smith,  book  iv.  ch.  7. 
2  Ihwi. 
'  Adam  Smith's  Wealth  of  Nations,  book  iv.  ch.  7.  *  Ibid. 


Free  from  Imperial  Taxation.         343 

polled  by  the  rapacity  of  satraps  and  pashas,  and 
the  greed  of  the  central  government.  The  Greek 
colonies,  which  resembled  those  of  England  more 
than  any  other  dependencies  of  antiquity,  were 
forced  to  send  contributions  to  the  treasury  of  the 
parent  state.  Carthage  exacted  tribute  from  her 
subject  towns  and  territories.  The  Eoman  provinces 
'  paid  tribute  unto  Caesar.'  In  modem  times,  Spain 
received  tribute  from  her  European  dependencies, 
and  a  revenue  from  the  gold  and  silver  mines  of  her 
American  colonies.  It  was  also  the  policy  of  France, 
Holland,  and  Portugal  to  derive  a  revenue  from  their 
settlements.^ 

But  England,  satisfied  with  the  colonial  trade,  by 
which  her  subjects,  at  home,  were  enriched,  EngUsh 
imposed  upon  them  alone  all  the  burthens  free  from 

imperial 

of  the  state.*  Her  costly  wars,  the  interest  of  taxation. 
her  increasing  debt,  her  naval  and  military  establish- 
ments,— adequate  for  the  defence  of  a  widespread  em- 
pire,— were  all  maintained  by  the  dominant  country 
herself.    James  II.  would  have  levied  taxes  Arguments 
upon  the  colonists  of  Massachusetts:  but  taxation, 
was  assured  by  Sir  "William  Jones  that  he  could  no 
more   '  levy   money   without   their   consent   in   an 
assembly,  than  they  could  discharge  themselves  from 
their   allegiance.'^     Fifty  years   later,  the   shrewd 
instinct  of  Sir  Kobert  Walpole  revolted  against  a 

^  Sir  Gr.  C.  Lewis  on  the  Government  of  Dependencies,  99,  101, 
106,  112,  124,  139,  149,  211,  et  seg_. ;  Adam  Smith,  book  iv.  ch.  7  * 
Kaynal,  Livres  i.  ii.  vi.-ix.  xii.  xiii. 

'^  '  The  English  colonists  have  never  yet  contributed  anything  to- 
wards the  defence  of  the  mother  country,  or  towards  the  support  of 
its  civil  government.* — Adam  Smith,  book  iv.  ch.  7. 

*  Grahame's  Hist,  cf  the  United  States,  i.  366. 


344  Colonies. 

similar  attempt.*  But  at  length,  in  an  evil  hour,  it 
was  resolved  by  Greorge  III.  and  his  minister  Mr. 
Grrenville,^  that  the  American  colonies  should  be 
required  to  contribute  to  the  general  revenues  of 
the  government.  This  new  principle  was  apparently 
recommended  by  many  considerations  of  justice  and 
expediency.  Much  of  the  national  debt  had  been 
incurred  in  defence  of  the  colonies,  and  in  wars  for 
the  common  cause  of  the  whole  empire.^  Other 
states  had  been  accustomed  to  enrich  themselves  by 
the  taxation  of  their  dependencies ;  and  why  was 
England  alone  to  abstain  from  so  natural  a  source  of 
revenue  ?  If  the  colonies  were  to  be  exempt  from 
the  common  burthens  of  the  empire,  why  should 
England  care  to  defend  them  in  war,  or  incur 
charges  for  them  in  time  of  peace  ?  The  benefits 
of  the  connexion  were  reciprocal ;  why,  then,  should 
the  burthens  be  all  on  one  side  ?  Nor,  assimiing  the 
equity  of  imperial  taxation,  did  it  seem  beyond  the 
competence  of  Parliament  to  establish  it.  The 
omnipotence  of  Parliament  was  a  favourite  theory  of 
lawyers  ;  and  for  a  century  and  a  half,  the  force  of 
British  statutes  had  been  acknowledged  without 
question,  in  every  matter  concerning  the  govern- 
ment of  the  colonies. 

No  charters   exempted  colonists  from  the  sove- 
reignty of  the  parent  state,  in  matters  of  taxation ; 


'  "Walpole's  Mem.,  ii.  70.  *I  haye  Old  England  set  against  ntie,' 
he  said,— by  the  excise  scheme, — *  do  you  think  I  will  have  New 
England  likewise  ? ' — Coxe^s  Life,  i.  123. 

2  WraxaU's  Mem.,  ii.  Ill;  Nichols'  Eecoll.,  i.  205;  Bancroft's 
Amer.  Kev.,  iii.  307. 

'  Adam  Smith,  book  iv.  eh.  7 ;  Walpole's  Mem.,  ii.  71. 


Arguments  against  Taxation,         345 

nor  were  there  wanting  precedents,  in  whicli  they 
had  submitted  to  imperial  imposts  without  remon- 
strance. In  carrying  out  a  restrictive  commercial 
policy,  Parliament  had  passed  numerous  acts  pro- 
viding for  the  levy  of  colonial  import  and  export 
duties.  Such  duties,  from  their  very  nature,  were 
unproductive, — imposing  restraints  upon  trade,  and 
offering  encouragements  to  smuggling.  They  were 
designed  for  commercial  regulation  rather  than 
revenue :  but  were  collected  by  the  king's  officers, 
and  payable  into  the  exchequer.  The  state  had 
further  levied  postage  duties  within  the  colonies.^ 

But  these  considerations  were  outweighed  by  rea- 
sons on  the  other  side.     Grranting  that  the  Arguments 

on  the  other 

war  expenditure  of  the  mother  country  had  side. 
been  increased  by  reason  of  her  colonies,  who  was 
responsible  for  European  wars  and  costly  armaments  ? 
Not  the  colonies,  which  had  no  voice  in  the  govern- 
ment :  but  their  English  rulers,  who  held  in  their 
hands  the  destinies  of  the  empire.  And  if  the  Eng- 
lish treasury  had  suffered,  in  defence  of  the  colonies, 
— the  colonists  had  taxed  themselves  heavily  for 
protection  against  the  foes  of  the  mother  country, 
with  whom  they  had  no  quarrel.^  But,  apart  from 
the  equity  of  the  claim,  was  it  properly  within  the 
jurisdiction   of    Parliament   to    enforce   it?      The 

»  Evidence  of  Dr.  Franklin,  1766;  Pari.  Hist.,  xvi.  143;  Sted- 
man's  Hist,  of  the  American  War,  i.  10,  44;  Eights  of  Great 
Britain  Asserted,  102;  Adolphns's  Hist.,  i.  145  ;  Bancroft's  Hist,  of 
the  American  Eevolution,  ii.  260,  et  seq. ;  Dr.  Johnson's  Taxation  no 
Tyranny,  Works,  xii.  177;  Speech  of  Lord  Mansfield,  Jan.  1766; 
Pari.  Hist.,  xvi,  166  ;  Burke's  Speech  on  American  Taxation,  1774, 
Works,  ii.  380  ;  Speech  of  Grovernor  Pownall,  Nov.  16th,  1775;  Pari. 
Hist.,  xviii.  984. 

2  Dr.  Franklin's  Ev.,  Pari.  Hist,  xvi.  139. 


346  Colonies. 

colonists  might  be  induced  to  grant  a  contribution  : 
but  could  Parliament  constitutionally  impose  a  tax, 
without  their  consent?  True,  that  this  imperial 
legislature  could  make  laws  for  the  government  of 
the  colonies :  but  taxation  formed  a  marked  excep- 
tion to  general  legislation.  According  to  the  prin- 
ciples, traditions,  and  usage  of  the  constitution, 
taxes  were  granted  by  the  people,  through  their 
representatives.  This  privilege  had  been  recognised 
for  centuries,  in  the  parent  state ;  and  the  colonists 
had  cherished  it  with  traditional  veneration,  in  the 
country  of  their  adoption.  They  had  taxed  them- 
selves, for  local  objects,  through  their  own  represen- 
tatives :  they  had  responded  to  requisitions  from  the 
crown  for  money :  but  never  until  now,  had  it  been 
sought  to  tax  them  directly,  for  imperial  purposes, 
by  the  authority  of  Parliament. 

A  statesman  imbued  with  the  free  spirit  of  our 
constitution  could  not  have  failed  to  recognise  these 
overruling  principles.  He  would  have  seen,  that  if 
it  were  fit  that  the  colonies  should  contribute  to  the 
imperial  treasury,  it  was  for  the  crown  to  demand 
their  contributions  through  the  governors  ;  and  for 
the  colonial  legislatures  to  grant  them.  But  neither 
the  king  nor  his  minister  were  alive  to  these  princi- 
ples. The  one  was  too  conscious  of  kingly  power,  to 
measure  nicely  the  rights  of  his  subjects ;  and  the 
other  was  blinded  by  a  pedantic  reverence  for  the 
authority  of  Parliament.^ 

In  1764,  an  act  was  passed,  with  little  discussion, 

*  "Walpole's  Mem.,  ii.  70,  220 ;  Bancroft's  Hist,  of  the  American 
Eevolution,  ii.  88. 


The  Stamp  Act,  1765.  347 

imposing  customs'  duties  upon  several  articles  im- 
ported into  the  American  colonies, — the  i^e  stamp 
produce  of  these  duties  being  reserved  for  ■^*'^'  ^^^' 
the  defence  of  the  colonies  themselves.*  At  the  same 
time,  the  Commons  passed  a  resolution,  that '  it  may 
be  proper  to  charge  certain  stamp  duties  '  in  Ame- 
rica,^ as  the  foundation  of  future  legislation.  The 
colonists,  accustomed  to  perpetual  interference  with 
their  trade,  did  not  dispute  the  right  of  the  mother 
country  to  tax  their  imports  :  but  they  resolved  to 
evade  the  impost,  as  far  as  possible,  by  the  encou- 
ragement of  native  manufactures.  The  threatened 
Stamp  Act,  however,  they  immediately  denounced 
as  an  invasion  of  the  rights  of  Englishmen,  who 
could  not  be  taxed  otherwise  than  by  their  repre- 
sentatives. But,  deaf  to  their  remonstrances,  Mr. 
Grrenville,  in  the  next  session,  persisted  in  his  stamp 
bill.  It  attracted  little  notice  in  this  country :  the 
people  could  bear  with  complacency  the  taxation  of 
others;  and  never  was  there  a  Parliament  more 
indifferent  to  constitutional  principles,  and  popular 
rights.  The  colonists,  however,  and  their  agents  in 
this  country,  remonstrated  against  the  proposal. 

Their  opinion  had  been  invited  by  ministers; 
and  that  it  might  be  expressed,  a  year's  delay  had 
been  agreed  upon.   Yet  when  they  petitioned  against 

'  4  Geo.  III.  c.  15.  Mr.  Bancroft  regards  a  meastire,  introduced 
by  Mr.  Townshend  in  the  previous  session  for  lowering  some  of  the 
prohibitory  duties,  and  making  them  productive,  as  the  commence- 
ment of  the  plan  for  the  taxation  of  America ;  but  that  measure 
merely  dealt  with  existing  duties.  It  was  not  until  1764  that  any 
new  issue  was  raised  with  the  colonies. — Hist,  of  American  Eevolu- 
tion,  ii.  102. 

2  March  10th,  1764.  Pari.  Hist.,  xv.  1427;  Grahame's  Hist., 
iv.  179. 


34^  Colonies, 

the  bill,  the  Commons  refused  to  entertain  their 
petitions,  under  a  rule,  by  no  means  binding  on 
their  discretion,  which  excluded  petitions  against  a 
tax  proposed  for  the  service  of  the  yearJ  An  arbi- 
trary temper  and  narrow  pedantry  prevailed  over 
justice  and  sound  policy.  Unrepresented  communi- 
ties were  to  be  taxed, — even  without  a  hearing. 
The  bill  was  passed  with  little  opposition  :  ^  but  the 
colonists  combined  to  resist  its  execution.  Mr.  Pitt 
had  been  ill  in  bed  when  the  Stamp  Act  was  passed  : 
but  no  sooner  were  the  discontents  in  America 
brought  into  discussion,  than  he  condemned  taxation 
without  representation;  and  counselled  the  imme- 
diate repeal  of  the  obnoxious  Act.  '  When  in  this 
House,'  he  said,  '  we  give  and  grant,  we  grant  what 
is  our  own.  But  in  an  American  tax,  what  do  we 
do  ?  We,  Your  Majesty's  Commons  for  Grreat 
Britain,  give  and  grant  to  Your  Majesty — what  ? 
Our  own  property  ?  No  :  we  give  and  grant  to  Your 
Majesty  the  property  of  Your  Majesty's  Commons 
of  America.'  At  the  same  time,  he  proposed  to  save 
the  honour  of  England  by  an  act  declaratory  of  the 
general  legislative  authority  of  Parliament  over  the 
colonies.^  Lord  Eockingham,  who  had  succeeded 
Mr.  Grrenville,  alarmed  by  the  imanimity  and  vio- 
lence of  the  colonists,  readily  caught  at  Mr.  Pitt's 

*  This  monstrous  rule,  or  usage,  which  set  at  naught  the  right  of 
petition  on  the  most  important  matters  of  public  concern,  dates 
from  the  Eevolution  ;  and  was  not  relinquished  until  1842. — Hatsell, 
Prec,  iii.  226 ;  May's  Proceedings  and  Usage  of  Parliament,  6th 
ed.,  616. 

2  Pari.  Hist.,  xvi.  34.  '  We  might  as  well  have  hindered  the  sun's 
setting,'  wrote  Franklin. — Bancroft,  ii.  281. 

«  Pjirl.  Hist.,  xvi.  93  ;  Life  of  Lord  Chatham,  i.  427. 


Repeal  of  the  Stamp  Act.  349 

suggestion.  The  Stamp  Act  was  repealed,  notwith- 
standing the  obstinate  resistance  of  the  king  Repeal  of 
and  his  friends,  and  of  Mr.  Grrenville  and  Act.  ^ 
the  supporters  of  the  late  ministry.^  Mr.  Pitt  had 
desired  expressly  to  except  from  the  declaratory  act 
the  right  of  taxation,  without  the  consent  of  the 
colonists:  but  the  crown  lawyers  and  Lord  Mans- 
field denied  the  distinction  between  legislation  and 
the  imposition  of  taxes,  which  that  great  constitu- 
tional statesman  had  forcibly  pointed  out ;  and  the 
bill  was  introduced  without  that  exception.  In  the 
House  of  Lords,  Lord  Camden,  the  only  sound  con- 
stitutional lawyer  of  his  age,  supported  with  re- 
markable power  the  views  of  Mr.  Pitt :  but  the  bill 
was  passed  in  its  original  shape,  and  maintained  the 
unqualified  right  of  England  to  make  laws  for  the 
colonies.^  In  the  same  session  some  of  the  import 
duties  imposed  in  1764  were  also  repealed,  and 
others  modified.^  The  colonists  were  appeased  by 
these  concessions ;  and  little  regarded  the  abstract 
terms  of  the  declaratory  act.  They  were,  indeed, 
encouraged  in  a  spirit  of  independence,  by  their 
triumph  over  the  English  Parliament:  but  their 
loyalty  was  as  yet  unshaken.* 

The  error  of  Mr.  Grenville  had  scarcely  been  re- 

'  Walpole's  Mem.,  ii.  258,  285,  &c. ;  Eockingham  Mem.,  i.  291- 
295  ;  ii.  250,  294. 

2  6  Geo.  III.  c.  11,  12  ;  Pari.  Hist.,  xvi.  163, 177,  &c.;  Walpole's 
Mem.,  ii.  277-298,  304-307,  &c. ;  Eockingham  Mem.,  i.  282-293  ; 
Bancroft,  ii.  459-473 ;  Chatham  Corr.,  ii.  375. 

3  6  Geo.  III.  c.  52. 

*  Stedman's  Hist.,  i.  48,  et  seg^. ;  Bancroft's  Hist,  of  the  American 
llevolution,  ii.  523 ;  Burke's  Speech  on  American  Taxation :  see  also 
Lord  Macaula/s  Life  of  Lord  Chatham,  Essays ;  Lord  Campbell's 
Lives  of  the  Chief  Justices  (Lord  Camden). 


350  Colonies, 

paired,  when  an  act  of  political  fatuity  caused 
Mr  Charles  ^^  irreparable  breach  between  the  mother 
coSS^''*^'^  'country  and  her  colonies.  Lord  Chatham, 
taxes,  1767.  -j^y  j^j^g  ^^jj^cly  intervention,  had  saved 
England  her  colonies ;  and  now  his  ill-omened  ad- 
ministration was  destined  to  lose  them.  His  witty 
and  accomplished,  but  volatile  and  incapable  Chan- 
cellor of  the  Exchequer,  Mr.  Charles  Townshend, 
having  lost  half  a  million  of  his  ways  and  means,  by 
an  adverse  vote  of  the  Commons  on  the  land  tax,^ 
ventured,  with  incredible  levity,  to  repeat  the  dis- 
astrous experiment  of  colonial  taxation.  The 
Americans,  to  strengthen  their  own  case  against  the 
Stamp  Act,  had  drawn  a  distinction  between  internal 
and  external  taxation, — a  distinction  plausible  and 
ingenious,  in  the  hands  of  so  dexterous  a  master  of 
political  fence  as  Dr.  Franklin,^  but  substantially 
without  foundation.  Both  kinds  of  taxes  were 
equally  paid  by  the  colonists  themselves ;  and  if  it 
was  their  birthright  to  be  taxed  by  none  but  re- 
presentatives of  their  own,  this  doctrine  clearly 
comprehended  customs,  no  less  than  excise.  But, 
misled  by  the  supposed  distinction  which  the 
Americans  themselves  had  raised,  Mr.  Townshend 
proposed  a  variety  of  small  colonial  customs'  duties, 
— on  glass,  on  paper,  on  painters'  colours,  and  lastly, 
on  tea.  The  estimated  produce  of  these  paltry 
taxes  amounted  to  no  more  than  40,000^.  Lord 
Chatham  would  have  scornfully  put  aside  a  scheme, 
at  once  so  contemptible  and  impolitic,  afid  so  plainly 
in  violation  of  the  principles  for  which  he  had  him- 
'  Svpra,  Vol.11.  101.  ^  Pari.  Hist,  svi.  144. 


Tea  Duties,  351 

self  recently  contended :  but  he  lay  stricken  and 
helpless,  while  his  rash  lieutenant  was  rushing  head- 
long into  danger.  Lord  Camden  would  have 
arrested  the  measure  in  the  Cabinet ;  but  standing 
alone,  in  a  disorganised  ministry,  he  accepted  under 
protest  a  scheme,  which  none  of  his  colleagues 
approved.^  However  rash  the  financier,  however 
weak  the  compliance  of  ministers.  Parliament  fully 
shared  the  fatal  responsibility  of  this  measure.  It 
was  passed  with  approbation,  and  nearly  in  silence.'^ 
Mr.  Townshend  did  not  survive  to  see  the  mischief 
he  had  done  :  but  his  colleagues  had  soon  to  deplore 
their  error.  The  colonists  resisted  the  import  duties, 
as  they  had  resisted  the  Stamp  Act ;  and,  a  second 
time,  ministers  were  forced  to  recede  from  their  false 
position.     But  their  retreat  was  effected  au  repealed 

■^  but  the  tea 

awkwardly,  and  with  a  bad  grace.      They  duties. 
yielded  to  the  colonists,  so  far  as  to  give  up  the 
general  scheme  of  import  duties :  but  persisted  in- 
continuing  the  duties  upon  tea.^ 

This  miserable  remnant  of  the  import  duties  was 
not  calculated  to  afford  a  revenue  exceed-  insignm. 

cance  of  the 

mg  12,0006. ;  and  its  actual  proceeds  were  teadutiea. 
reduced  to  300^  by  smuggling,  and  the  determi- 
nation of  the  colonists  not  to  consume  an  -article  to 
which  the  obnoxious  impost  was  attached.  The  in- 
significance of  the  tax,  while  it  left  ministers  with- 
out justification  for  continuing  such  a  cause  of  irri- 

^  See  Lord  Camden's  Statement. — ^Parl.  Hist.,  xviii.  1222. 

2  7  Geo.  III.  c.  46 ;  Rockingham  Mem.,  ii.  75 ;  Bancroft's  Hist,  of 
the  American  Eevolution,  iii.  83,  et  seq. 

8  10  Geo.  III.  c.  17;  Pari.  Hist.,  xvi.  853;  Cavendish  Deb., 
ii.  484. 


-^'^2  Colonies. 

tation,  went  far  to  secure  the  acquiescence  of  tlie 
colonists.  But  their  discontents, — met  without 
temper  or  moderation, — were  suddenly  inflamed  by 
a  new  measure,  which  only  indirectly  concerned 
Drawbacks    them.     To  assist  the  half-bankrupt   East 

granted  on 

tea.  India  Company,  in  the  sale  of  their  teas, 

a  drawback  was  given  them,  of  the  whole  English 
duty,  on  shipments  to  the  American  plantations.^ 
By  this  concession  to  the  East  India  Company,  the 
colonists,  exempted  from  the  English  duty,  in  fact 
received  their  teas  at  a  lower  rate  than  when  there 
was  no  colonial  tax.  The  Company  were  also  em- 
powered to  ship  their  teas  direct  from  their  own 
warehouses.  A  sudden  stimulus  was  thus  given  to 
the  export  of  the  very  article,  which  alone  caused 
irritation  and  dissension.  The  colonists  saw,  or 
affected  to  see,  in  this  measure,  an  artful  contriv- 
ance for  encouraging  the  consumption  of  taxed  tea, 
and  facilitating  the  further  extension  of  colonial 
taxation.  It  was  met  by  a  daring  outrage.  The 
Attack  upon  ^^^^  toa-ships  which  reached  Boston  were 
at^B^tonl^^  boarded  by  men  disguised  as  Mohawk  In- 
^^^^'  dians,  and  their  cargoes  cast  into  the  sea.* 

This  being  the  crowning  act  of  a  series  of  provoca- 
tions and  insults,  by  which  the  colonists,  and  es- 
pecially the  people  of  Boston,  had  testified  their 
resentment  against  the  Stamp  Act,  the  import  duties, 
and  other  recent  measures,  the  government  at  home 
regarded  it  with  just  indignation.    Every  one  agreed 

^  12  aeo.  III.  c.  60  ;  13  Geo.  III.  c.  44.  The  former  of  these  Acts 
granted  a  drawback  of  three-fifths  only. 

2  Adams*  "Works,  ii.  322 ;  Bancroft's  Hist,  of  the  American  Eev., 
iii.  614-641.  &c 


Boston  Port  Act,  i"]"]^,  353 

that  the  rioters  deserved  punishment ;  and  that  re- 
paration was  due  to  the  East  India  Company.  But  the 
punishment  inflicted  by  Parliament,  at  the  instance 
of  Lord  North,  was  such  as  to  provoke  revolt.    Instead 
of  demanding  compensation,  and  attaching  penalties 
to  its  refusal,  the  flourishing  port  of  Bos-  Bos^n  p^^ 
ton  was  summarily  closed :  no  ship  could  ^^^'  "^^^*' 
lade  or  unlade  at  its  quays :  the  trade  and  industry 
of  its  inhabitants  were  placed  under  an  interdict. 
The  ruin  of  the  city  was   decreed:    no  penitence 
could   avert  its  doom:  but  when  the  punishment 
had  been  sufi'ered,  and  the  atonement  made  :  when 
Boston,  humbled  and  contrite,  had  kissed  the  rod ; 
and  when  reparation  had  been  made  to  the  East 
India  Company,  the  king  in  council  might,  as  an 
act  of  grace,  remove  the  fatal  ban.'     It  was  a  deed 
of  vengeance,  fitter  for  the  rude  arbitrament  of  an 
eastern  prince,  than  for  the  temperate  equity  of  a 
free  state. 

Nor  was  this  the  only  act  of  repression.  The  re- 
publican constitution  of  Massachusetts,  constitution 
cherished  by  the  descendants  of  the  pilgrim  STuper!" 
fathers,  was  superseded.  The  council,  ^^®^ 
hitherto  elective,  was  to  be  nominated  by  the  crown ; 
and  the  appointment  of  judges,  magistrates,  and 
sheriffs,  was  transferred  from  the  council  to  the 
p-overnor.2  ^^^  g^  inuch  was  the  administration  of 
justice  suspected,  that  by  another  act,  accused  persons 

»  Boston  Port  Act,  14  Geo.  III.  c.  19;  Pari.  Hist.,  xvii.  1159- 
1189;  Chatham  Corr.,  iv.  342  ;  Eockingham  Mem.,  ii.  238-243 ;  Ban- 
croft's Hist.,  iii.  565,  et  seq. 

2  14  Geo.  III.  c.  45;  Pari.  Hist.,  xvii.  1192,  1277,  &c. 

VOL.  III.  A  A 


354  Colo7iies. 

miglit  be  sent  for  trial  to  any  other  colony,  or  even 
to  England.*  Troops  were  also  despatched  to  over- 
awe the  turbulent  people  of  Massachusetts. 

The  colonists,  however,  far  from  being  intimi- 
Rcsistance     dated  bv  the  riffours  of  the  mother  country, 

oftheCOlO-  .      /    ,    ^  .    ^    ^T.  XT  TIC 

nists.  associated  to  resist  them,     ^or  was  Massa- 

chusetts left  alone  in  its  troubles.  A  congress  of 
delegates  from  twelve  of  the  colonies  was  assembled 
at  Philadelphia,  by  whom  the  recent  measures  were 
condemned,  as  a  violation  of  the  rights  of  English- 
men. It  was  further  agreed  to  suspend  all  imports 
from,  and  all  exports  to,  G-reat  Britain  and  her 
dependencies,  imless  the  grievances  of  the  colonies 
were  redressed.  Other  threatening  measures  were 
adopted,  which  proved  too  plainly  that  the  stubborn 
spirit  of  the  colonists  was  not  to  be  overcome.  In 
the  words  of  Lord  Chatham,  '  the  spirit  which  now 
resisted  taxation  in  America,  was  the  same  spirit 
which  formerly  opposed  loans,  benevolences,  and 
ship-money  in  England.'* 

In  vain  Lord  Chatham, — appearing  after  his  long 
LoTdChafc-  prostratiou, — proffered  a  measure  of  con- 
Sti^pro-  ciliation,  repealing  the  obnoxious  acts,  and 
?2fiSl  explicitly  renouncing  imperial  taxation: 
■^'^^'  but  requiring  from  the  colonies  the  grant 

of  a  revenue  to  the  king.  Such  a  measure  might 
even  yet  have  saved  the  colonies  :  ^  but  it  was  con- 
temptuously rejected  by  the  Lords,  on  the  first 
reading.'* 

>  14  Geo.  in.  c.  39  ;  Pari.  Hist,  xvii.  1199,  &c. 

=  Speech,  Jan.  20th,  177".— ParL  Hist,  xriii.  154,  «. 

'  See  Lord  Mahon's  Hist.,  vi.  43. 

*  Feb.  1st,  1775.— Pari.  Hist,  xyiii.  198. 


IVar  of  American  Independence.        355 

Lord   North   himself  soon   afterwards   framed  a 
conciliatory   proposition,   promising   that,  propositions 
if  the  colonists  should  make  provision  for  SJorthlnd 
their  own  defence,  and  for  the  civil  govern-  p/b.'^^mh^ 
ment,  no  imperial  tax  should  be  levied.  ■^'^''' 
Plis  resolution  was  agreed  to:  but,  in  the  present 
temper  of  the  colonists,  its  conditions  were  imprac- 
ticable.^    Mr.  Burke  also  proposed  other  ^j-^rch  22nd, 
resolutions,  similar  to  the  scheme  of  Lord  ^'^"'' 
Chatham,   which    were   rejected    by   a   large   ma- 
jority.2 

The  Americans  were  already  ripe  for  rebellion, 
when   an   unhappy    collision   occurred   at  outbreak  of 
Lexington,  between  the  royal  troops  and  *vavrAprii 
the  colonial  militia.    Blood  was  shed  ;  and  ^^^^'"'^• 
the  people  flew  to  arms.     The  war  of  independence 
was  commenced.  Its  sad  history  and  issue  are  but  too 
well  known.     In  vain  Congress  addressed  petition  to 
a  petition   to   the  king,   for  redress   and  sept^TsI', 
conciliation.     It  received  no  answer^     In  ^^'^' 
vain  Lord  Chatham  devoted  the  last  energies  of  his 
Vv^asting  life^  to  effect  a  reconciliation,  without  re- 
nouncing the  sovereignty  of  England.     In  vain  the 
British  Parliament, — humbling  itself  be-  overtures 

for  peace, 

fore  its  rebellious  subjects, — repealed  the  i778. 
American  tea  duty,  and  renounced  its  claims  to  im- 

»  Pari.  Hist,  xviii.  319  ;  Chatham  Corr.,  iy.  403  ;  Gibbon's  Post- 
humous Woi'ks,  i.  490. 

-  Pari.  Hist.,  xviii.  478 ;  Burke's  Works,  iii.  23. 

2  Lord  Chatham  was  completely  secluded  from  political  and  social 
life,  from  the  spring  of  1767  to  the  spring  of  1769  ;  and  again,  from 
the  spring  of  1775  to  the  spring  of  1777- 

A  A  2 


356  Colojttes. 

perial  taxation.*  In  vain  were  parliamentary' com- 
missioners empowered  to  suspend  the  acts  of  which 
the  colonists  complained, — to  concede  every  demand 
but  that  of  independence, — and  almost  to  sue  for 
peace.2  It  was  too  late  to  stay  the  civil  war. 
Disasters  and  defeat  befell  the  British  arms,  on 
American  soil ;  and,  at  length,  the  independence  of 
the  colonies  was  recognised.^ 

Such  were  the  disastrous  consequences  of  a  mis- 
understanding of  the  rights  and  pretensions  of  colo- 
nial communities,  who  had  carried  with  them  the  laws 
and  franchises  of  Englishmen.  And  here  closes  the 
first  period  in  the  constitutional  history  of  the 
colonies. 

We  must  now  turn  to  another  class  of  dependen- 
croTvn  coio-  ^^^^^  ^<^^  Originally  settled  by  English  sub- 
^^^'  jects,  but  acquired  from  other  states  by 

conquest  or  cession.  To  these  a  different  rule  of 
public  law  was  held  to  apply.  They  were  dominions 
of  the  crown,  and  governed,  according  to  the  laws 
prevailing  at  the  time  of  their  acquisition,  by  the 
Free  con-  ^^^S  ^^  couucil.'*  They  wcro  distinguished 
SownToio-°  from  other  settlements  as  crown  colonies. 
^^^'  Some    of    them,   however,   like   Jamaica 

»  28  Geo.  III.  c.  12;  Pari.  Hist.,  xix.  762;  Ann.  Eeg.,  1778, 
133 

2'28Geo.  III.  c.  13. 
•  ^  No  part  of  English  history  has  received  more  copious  illustra- 
tion than  the  revolt  of  the  American  colonies.  In  addition  to  the 
general  histories  of  England,  the  following  may  be  consulted  : 
Franklin's  Works,  Sparks'  Life  of  Washington,  Marshall's  Life  of 
Washington,  Eandolph's  Mem.  of  Jefferson,  Chalmers'  Political 
Annals,  Dr.  Gordon's  History  of  the  American  Eevolution,  Gra- 
hame's  History  of  the  United  States,  Stedman's  History,  Bancroft's 
History  of  the  American  Eevolution. 

4  Clark's  Colonial  La-sv,  4^  Mills'  Colonial  Constitutions,  19,  &;c. 


Canada.  357 

and  Nova  Scotia,  had  received  the  free  institu- 
tions of  England,  and  were  practically  self-governed, 
like  other  English  colonies.  Canada,  the  most  im- 
portant of  this  class,  was  conquered  from  Canada, 
the  French,  in  1759,  by  Greneral  Wolfe,  and  ceded 
to  England  in  1763,  by  the  treaty  of  Paris.  In 
1774,  the  administration  of  its  affairs  was  intrusted 
to  a  council  appointed  by  the  crown  :^  but  in  1791, 
it  was  divided  into  two  provinces,  to  each  of  which 
representative  institutions  were  granted.^  It  was 
no  easy  problem  to  provide  for  the  government  of 
such  a  colony.  It  comprised  a  large  and  ignorant 
population  of  French  colonists,  having  sympathies 
with  the  country  whence  they  sprang,  accustomed 
to  absolute  government  and  feudal  institutions,  and 
under  the  influence  of  a  Catholic  priesthood.  It 
further  comprised  an  active  race  of  British  settlers, 
speaking  another  language,  professing  a  different 
religion,  and  craving  the  liberties  of  their  own  free 
land.  The  division  of  the  provinces  was  also  a 
separation  of  races ;  and  freedom  was  granted  to 
both  alike.^  The  immediate  objects  of  this  measure 
were  to  secure  the  attachment  of  Canada,  and  to 
exempt  the  British  colonists  from  the  French  laws  : 
but  it  marked  the  continued  adhesion  of  Parliament 
to  the  principles  of  self-government.  In  discussing 
its  policy,  Mr.  Fox  laid  down  a  principle,  which  was 
destined,  after  half  a  century,  to  become  the  rule  of 
colonial  administration.     '  I  am  convinced,'  said  he, 

1  14  Geo.  III.  c.  83. 

2  31  Geo.  III.  c.  31  ;  Pari.  Hist.,  xxviii.  1377. 

3  See  Lord  Durham's  description  of  tho  two  races. — Eeport,  1839, 
p.  8-18. 


58  Colonies, 


'  that  the  only  means  of  retaining  distant  colonies 
with  advantage,  is  to  enable  them  to  govern  them- 
selves.'^ In  17i^5,  representative  institutions  were 
given  to  New  Brunswick,  and,  so  late  as  1832, 
to  Newfoundland;  and  thus,  eventually,  all  the 
Britisli  American  colonies  were  as  free,  in  their  forms 
of  government,  as  the  colonies  which  had  gained 
their  independence.  But  the  mother  country,  in 
granting  these  constitutions,  exercised,  in  a  marked 
form,  the  powers  of  a  dominant  state.  She  provided 
for  the  sale  of  waste  lands,  for  the  maintenance  of 
the  church  establishment,  and  for  other  matters  of 
internal  polity. 

England  was  soon  compensated  for  the  loss  of  her 
Australian  colonics  iu  America  by  vast  possessions  in 
colonies.  another  hemisphere.  But  the  circum- 
stances under  which  Australia  was  settled  were  un- 
favourable to  free  institutions.  Transportation  to 
the  American  plantations,  commenced  in  the  reign 
of  Charles  II.,  had  long  been  an  established  punish- 
ment for  criminals.^  The  revolt  of  these  colonies 
led  to  the  establishment  of  penal  settlements  in 
Australia.  New  South  Wales  was  founded  in  1788,^ 
and  Van  Diemen's  Land  in  1825.'*  Penal  settle- 
ments were  necessarily  without  a  constitution,  being 
little  more  than  state  prisons.     These  fair  countries, 

»  March  6tb,  1791 ;  Pari.  Hist.,  xxvlii.  1379  ;  Lord  J.  Kussell's 
Life  of  Fox,  ii.  259  ;  liOrd  Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt,  ii.  89. 

'  4  Geo.  I.  c.  2 ;  6  Geo.  I.  c.  23.  Banishment  was  made  a  punish- 
mr^nt,  in  1597,  by  39  Elizabeth,  c.  4  ;  and  transportation,  by  orders 
in  council,  in  1614,  1615,  and  1617. — Mills'  Colonial  Constitu- 
tions, 344. 

3  24  Geo.  III.  c.  56  ;  Orders  in  Council,  Dec.  6th,  1786. 

*  MiUs'  Colonial  Const.,  325. 


Aicstralia,  359 

instead  of  being  the  homes  of  free  Englishmen,  were 
peopled  by  criminals  sentenced  to  long  terms  of 
punishment  and  servitude.  Such  an  origin  was  not 
promising  to  the  moral  or  political  destinies  of 
Australia:  but  the  attractions  which  it  offered 
to  free  emigrants  gave  early  tokens  of  its  future 
greatness.  South  Australia  and  New  Zealand, 
whence  convicts  were  excluded,  were  afterwards 
founded,  in  the  same  region,  without  free  con- 
stitutions. The  early  political  condition  of  the 
Australian  colonies  forms,  indeed,  a  striking  con- 
trast to  that  of  the  older  settlements,  to  which 
Englishmen  had  taken  their  birthrights.  But  free 
emigration  developed  their  resources,  and  quickly 
reduced  the  criminal  population  to  a  subordinate 
element  in  the  society  ;  and,  in  1828,  legislative 
councils  nominated  by  the  Crown,  were  granted  to 
New  South  Wales  and  Van  Diemen's  Land.' 

While  these  colonies  were  without  an  adequate 
population,  transportation  was  esteemed  by  Transport- 
the  settlers,  as  the  means  of  affording  a  continued. 
steady  supply  of  labour:  but  as  free  emigration 
advanced,  the  services  of  convicts  became  less  essen- 
tial to  colonial  prosperity  ;  and  the  moral  taint  of 
the  criminal  class  was  felt  more  sensibly.  In  1838, 
Sir  William  Molesworth's  committee  exposed  the 
enormities  of  transportation  as  part  of  a  scheme  of 
colonisation;  and  in  1840,  the  sending  of  convicts 
to  New  South  Wales  was  discontinued.  In  Van 
Diemen's  Land,  after  various  attempts  to  improve 
the  system  of  convict  labour  and  discipline,  trans- 

»  9  Geo.  IV.  c.  83. 


360  Colonies, 

portation  was  finally  abolished  in  1854.  Mean- 
while, an  attempt  to  send  convicts  to  the  Cape  of 
Grood  Hope  in  1848,  had  been  resisted  by  the  colo- 
nists, and  abandoned.  In  the  following  year,  a  new 
penal  settlement  was  founded  in  Western  Australia. 
,  The  discontinuance  of  transportation  to  the  free 
Free  con-       colouies  of  Australia,  and  a  prodigious  in- 

stimtiona  .  .  -,  -, 

to  Alls-         crease   of  emigration  and   productive  in- 

tralian  °  ^ 

colonies.  dustry,  were  preparing  them  for  a  fuither 
development  of  freedom,  at  no  distant  period. 

From  the  period  of  the  American  war  the  home 
Colonial  government,  awakened  to  the  importance 
tSSon^*  of  colonial  administration,  displayed  greater 
£lrSn  activity,  and  a  more  ostensible  disposition 
^^'  to  interfere  in  the  affairs  of  the  colonies. 

Until  the  commencement  of  the  difficulties  with 
America,  there  had  not  even  been  a  separate  depart- 
ment for  the  government  of  the  colonies :  but  the 
board  of  trade  exercised  a  supervision,  little  more 
than  nominal,  over  colonial  affairs.  In  1768,  how- 
ever, a  third  secretary  of  state  was  appointed,  to 
whose  care  the  colonies  were  intrusted.  In  1782, 
the  office  was  discontinued  by  Lord  Eockingham, 
after  the  loss  of  the  American  provinces :  but  was 
revived  in  1794,  and  became  an  active  and  im- 
portant department  of  the  state. ^  Its  influence  was 
felt  throughout  the  British  colonies.  However 
popular  the  form  of  their  institutions,  they  were 
steadily  governed  by  British  ministers  in  Downing 
Street. 

In  crown  colonies, — acquired  by  conquest  or  ces- 

»  Mills'  Colonial  Const.,  2-13. 


Colonial  Patronage.  361 

sion, — the  dominion  of  the  crown  was  absolute; 
and  the  authority  of  the  colonial  office  was  colonies 
exercised  directly,  by  instructions  to  the  gJLXning 
governors.  In  free  colonies  it  was  exercised,  ^^'^^^' 
for  the  most  part,  indirectly,  through  the  influence 
of  the  governors  and  their  councils.  Self-govern- 
ment was  there  the  theory:  but  in  practice,  the 
governors,  aided  by  dominant  interests  in  the  several 
colonies,  contrived  to  govern  according  to  the  policy 
dictated  from  Downing  Street.  Just  as  at  home, 
the  crown,  the  nobles,  and  an  ascendant  party  were 
supreme  in  the  national  councils, — so  in  the  colo- 
nies, the  governors  and  their  official  aristocracy 
were  generally  able  to  command  the  adhesion  of  the 
local  legislatures. 

A  more  direct  interference,  however,  was  often 
exercised.  Ministers  had  no  hesitation  in  disallow- 
ing any  colonial  acts  of  which  they  disapproved, 
even  when  they  concerned  the  internal  affairs  of  the 
colony  only.  They  dealt  freely  with  the  public 
lands,  as  the  property  of  the  crown :  often  making 
grants  obnoxious  to  the  colonists  ;  and  peremptorily 
insisting  upon  the  conditions  under  which  they 
should  be  sold  and  settled.  Their  interference  was 
also  frequent,  regarding  church  establishments  and 
endowments,  official  salaries  and  the  colonial  civil 
lists.  Misunderstandings  and  disputes  were  con- 
stant, but  the  policy  and  will  of  the  home  govern- 
ment usually  prevailed. 

Another  incident  of  colonial  administration  was 
that  of  patronage.     The  colonies  offered  a  Patronage, 
wide  field  of  employment  for  the  friends,  connexions, 


362  Colonies. 

and  political  partisans  of  the  liome  government. 
The  offices  in  England,  available  for  securing  par- 
liamentary support,  fell  short  of  the  demand ;  and 
appointments  were  accordingly  multiplied  abroad. 
Of  these,  many  of  the  most  lucrative  were  executed 
by  deputy.  The  favoured  friends  of  ministers,  who 
were  gratified  by  the  emoluments  of  office,  were  little 
disposed  to  suffer  banishment  in  a  distant  depen- 
dency. Infants  in  the  cradle  were  endowed  with 
colonial  appointments,  to  be  executed  through  life  by 
convenient  deputies.  Extravagant  fees  or  salaries 
were  granted  in  Downing  Street,  and  spent  in  Eng- 
land; but  paid  out  of  colonial  revenues.  Other 
offices  again,  to  which  residence  was  attached,  were 
too  frequently  given  to  men  wholly  unfit  for  em- 
ployment at  home,  but  who  were  supposed  to  be 
equal  to  colonial  service,  where  indolence,  incapa- 
city, or  doubtful  character  might  escape  exposure.' 
Such  men  as  these,  however,  were  more  mischievous 
in  a  colony  than  at  home.  The  higher  officers  were 
associated  with  the  governor,  in  the  administration 
of  affairs  :  the  subordinate  officers  were  subject  to 
less  control  and  discipline.  In  both,  negligence 
and  unfitness  were  injurious  to  the  colonies.  As 
colonial  societies  expanded,  these  appointments 
from  home  further  excited  the  jealousy  of  colonists, 
many  of  whom  were  better  qualified  for  office  than 

^  '  As  to  civil  oflBlcers  appointed  for  America,  most  of  the  places  in 
the  gift  of  the  crown  have  been  filled  with  broken  members  of  Par- 
liament, of  bad,  if  any,  principles, — valets  de  chamhre,  electioneering 
scoundrels,  and  even  livery  servants.  In  one  word,  America  has 
been,  for  many  years,  made  the  hospital  of  England.' — Letter  of 
General  Huske,  in  1753  ;  Phillimore's  Life  of  Lord  Lyttelton,  ii.  604, 
cited  by  Lord  Mahon. 


Neoi)  Co7mnercial  Relations.  363 

the  strangers  who  came  amongst  them  to  enjoy 
power,  wealth,  and  distinction,  which  were  denied 
to  themselves.^  This  jealousy  and  the  natural  am- 
bition of  the  colonists,  were  among  the  principal 
causes  which  led  to  demands  for  more  complete 
self-government.  As  this  feeling  was  increasing  in 
colonial  society,  the  home  government  were  occupied 
with  arrangements  for  insuring  the  permanent 
maintenance  of  the  civil  establishment  out  of  the 
colonial  revenues.  To  continue  to  fill  all  the  offices 
with  Englishmen,  and  at  the  same  time  to  call  upon 
the  jealous  colonists  to  pay  them,  was  not  to  be 
attempted.  And  accordingly  the  home  government 
surrendered  to  the  governors  all  appointments  under 
2OOL  a  year ;  and  to  the  greater  number  of  other 
offices,  appointed  colonists  recommended  by  the 
governors.^  A  colonial  grievance  was  thus  re- 
dressed, and  increased  influence  given  to  the  colo- 
nists ;  while  one  of  the  advantages  of  the  connexion 
was  renounced  by  the  parent  state. 

While  England  was  entering  upon  a  new  period 
of  extended  liberties,  after  theEeform  Act,  Newcom- 
circumstances  materially  affected  her  rela-  ^^^ 
tions  with  the  colonies ;  and  this  may  be  ?^e  co"^^ 
termed  the  third  and  last  period  of  colonial 
history.     First,  the  abolition  of  slavery,  in  1833, 
loosened  the  ties  by  which  the  sugar  colonies  had 
been  bound  to  the  mother  country.     This  was  fol- 

»  Long's  Hist,  of  Jamaica,  i.  27,  79 ;  Edwards'  Hist,  of  the  West 
Indies,  ii.  390  ;  Sir  Gr.  C.  Lewis  on  Dependencies,  278-284  ;  MS.  Me- 
morandum by  the  Eight  Hon.  Edw.  Ellice,  M.P. 

2  Earl  Grey's  Colonial  Policy,  i.  37-41 ;  Eules  and  Regulations  for 
Her  Majesty's  Colonial  Service,  ch.  iii. ;  Mills'  Colonial  Constitu- 
tions, App.  378. 


364  Colomcs. 

lowed  by  the  gradual  adoption  of  a  new  commercial 
policy,  which  overthrew  the  long-established  pro- 
tections and  monopolies  of  colonial  trade.  The 
main  purpose  for  which  both  parties  had  cherished 
the  connexion  was  lost.  Colonists  found  their  pro- 
duce exposed  to  the  competition  of  the  world ;  and, 
in  the  sugar  colonies,  with  restricted  labour.  The 
home  consumer,  independent  of  colonial  supplies, 
was  free  to  choose  his  own  market,  wherever  com- 
modities were  best  and  cheapest.  The  sugars  of 
Jamaica  competed  with  the  slave-grown  sugars  of 
Cuba:  the  woods  of  Canada  with  the  timber  of 
J^orway  and  the  Baltic. 

These  new  conditions  of  colonial  policy  seriously 
Its  effect  affected  the  political  relations  of  the  mother 
poHticai  country  with  her  dependencies.  Her  inter- 
coionies.  fercuce  in  their  internal  affairs  having 
generally  been  connected  with  commercial  regula- 
tions, she  had  now  less  interest  in  continuing  it; 
and  they,  having  submitted  to  it  for  the  sake  of 
benefits  with  which  it  was  associated,  were  less  dis- 
posed to  tolerate  its  exercise.  Meanwhile  the  grow- 
ing population,  wealth,  and  intelligence  of  many  of 
the  colonies,  closer  communications  with  England, 
and  the  example  of  English  liberties,  were  develop- 
ing the  political  aspirations  of  colonial  societies,  and 
their  capacity  for  self-government. 

Early  in  this  period  of  transition,  England  twice 
p^^^^_  had    occasion    to    assert    her    paramount 

Jamaica  authority :  but  learned  at  the  same  time 
repressed.  ^^  estimate  the  force  of  local  opinion,  and 
to  seek  in  the  further  development  of  free  institu- 
tions, the  problem  of  colonial  government.    Jamaica, 


Instcrrection  in  Canada,  365 

discontented  after  the  abolition  of  slavery,  neglected 
to  make  adequate  provision  for  her  prisons,  which 
that  measure  had  rendered  necessary.  In  1838,  the 
Imperial  Parliament  interposed,  and  promptly  sup- 
plied this  defect  in  colonial  legislation. ^  The  local 
assembly,  resenting  this  act  of  authority,  was  con- 
tumacious, stopped  the  supplies,  and  refused  to  ex- 
ercise the  proper  functions  of  a  legislature.  Again 
Parliament  asserted  its  supremacy.  The  sullen 
legislature  was  commanded  to  resume  its  duties; 
and  submitted  in  time  to  save  the  ancient  constitu- 
tion of  Jamaica  from  suspension.^ 

At  the  same  period,  the  perilous  state  of  Canada 
called  forth  all  the  authority  of  England,  insurrec- 
In  1837  and  1838,  the  discontents  of  Lower  Canada. 
Canada  exploded  in  insurrection.     The  constitution 
of  that  province  was  immediately  suspended  by  the 
British  Parliament ;  and  a  provisional  government 
was  established,  with  large  legislative  and  Eeimion 
executive  powers.^     This  necessary  act  of  provinces, 
authority  was  followed  by  the  reunion  of  the  pro- 
vinces of  Upper  and  Lower  Canada  into  a  single 
colony,  under  a  governor-general.'* 

But  while  these  strong  measures  were  resorted  to, 
the  British  Grovernment  carefully  defined  Right  of 

.  1  •    1  T  colonial 

the  principles  upon  which  paruamentary  seif-go- 
interposition  was  justified.    'Parliamentary  admitted, 
legislation,'  wrote  Lord  Glenelg,  the  colonial  minis- 
ter, 'on  any  subject  of  exclusively  internal  concern 
to  any  British  colony  possessing  a  representative 

J  1  &  2  Vict.  c.  67. 

2  2  &  3  Vict.   c.  26;  Ilans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xlvi.  1243;  xlvii. 
459,  &c. 

3  1  &  2  Vict.  c.  9 ;  2  &  3  Vict.  c.  53.  *  3  &  4  Vict.  c.  35. 


366  Colonies, 

assembly  is,  as  a  general  rule,  unconstitutional.  It 
is  a  right  of  which  the  exercise  is  reserved  for  ex- 
treme cases,  in  which  necessity  at  once  creates  and 
justifies  the  exception.'^  Never  before  had  the 
rights  of  colonial  self-government  been  so  plainly 
acknowledged. 

But  another  principle  was  about  to  be  established 
Principle  ^^  Canada,  which  still  further  enlarged 
ribiflo-'^"  ^^  powers  of  colonial  assemblies,  and 
vcrnment.  diminished  the  influence  of  the  mother 
country.  This  principle  is  known  as  the  doctrine 
of  responsible  government.  Hitherto  the  advisers 
of  the  governor  in  this,  as  in  every  other  colony, 
were  the  principal  officers  appointed  by  the  crown, 
and  generally  holding  permanent  offices.  Wliatever 
the  fluctuations  of  opinion  in  the  legislatm-e,  or  in 
the  colony, — whatever  the  unpopularity  of  the  mea- 
sures or  persons  of  the  executive  officers,  they  con- 
tinued to  direct  the  councils  of  the  colony.  For 
many  years,  they  had  contrived,  by  concessions,  by 
management  and  influence,  to  avoid  frequent  col- 
lisions with  the  assemblies :  but  as  the  principles  of 
representative  government  were  developed,  irrespon- 
sible rulers  were  necessarily  brought  into  conflict 
with  the  popular  assembly.  The  advisers  of  the 
governor  pursued  one  policy,  the  assembly  another. 
Measures  prepared  by  the  executive  were  rejected 
by  the  assembly :  measures  passed  by  the  assembly 
were  refused  by  the  council,  or  vetoed  by  the 
governor.  And  whenever  such  collisions  arose,  the 
constitutional  means  were  wanting,  for  restoring 
'  Pari.  Paper,  1829,  No.  118,  p.  7. 


Responsible  Government  367 

confidence  "between  the  contending  powers.'  Fre- 
quent dissolutions  exasperated  the  popular  party, 
and  generally  resulted  in  their  ultimate  triumph. 
The  hostility  between  the  assembly  and  permanent 
and  unpopular  ofi&cers  became  chronic.  They  were 
constantly  at  issue ;  and  representative  institutions, 
in  collision  with  irresponsible  power,  were  threaten- 
ing anarchy.  These  difficulties  were  not  confined 
to  Canada :  but  were  common  to  all  the  North 
American  colonies ;  and  proved  the  incompatibility 
of  two  antagonistic  principles  of  government.' 

After  the  reunion  of  the  Canadian  provinces,  a 
remedy  was  sought  for  disagreements  be-  introdnc 
tween  the  executive  and  the  legislature  in  gponSbif 
that  principle  of  ministerial  responsibility,  Et  into 
which  had  long  been  accepted  as  the  basis  ^^"^'^^^ 
of  constitutional  government  in  England.     At  first, 
ministers  at  home  were  apprehensive  lest  the  appli- 
cation  of  that  principle  to  a   dependency  should 
lead  to  a  virtual   renunciation   of  control  by  the 
mother  country.^     Nor  had  Canada  yet  sufficiently 
recovered  from  the  passions  of  the  recent  rebellion, 
to  favour  the  experiment.     But  arrangements  were 
immediately  made  for  altering  the  tenm-e  of  the 
principal  colonial  offices;  and  in  1847,  responsible 
government  was  fully  established  under  Lord  Elgin.'' 
From  that  time,  the  governor-general  selected  his 

»  See  Lord  Durham's  Eeport  on  Canada,  1839,  p.  27-39. 

■'  Ibid. 

3  Despatches  of  Lord  J.  Eiissell  to  Mr.  Poulett  Thomson,  governor- 
general  of  Canada,  Oct.  14th  and  16th,  1939;  Pari.  Papers,  1848, 
No.  621. 

*  Earl  Grey's  Colonial  Policy,  i.  200-234,  269;  Despatches  of 
Lord  Elgin ;  Pari.  Papers,  1848. 


368  Colo7iies. 

advisers  from  that  party  which  was  able  to  command 
a  majority  in  the  legislative  assembly;  and  accepted 
the  policy  recommended  by  them.^  The  same  prin- 
and  other  ciple  was  adopted,  about  the  same  time, 
colonies.  '^^  Nova  Scotia;^  and  has  since  become 
the  rule  of  administration  in  other  free  colonies.^ 

By  the  adoption  of  this  principle,  a  colonial  con- 
its  results,  stitution  has  become  the  very  image  and 
reflection  of  parliamentary  government  in  England. 
The  governor,  like  the  sovereign  whom  he  represents, 
holds  himself  aloof  from,  and  superior  to  parties ; 
and  governs  through  constitutional  advisers,  who 
have  acquired  an  ascendency  in  the  legislature.  He 
leaves  contending  parties  to  fight  out  their  own 
battles  ;  and  by  admitting  the  stronger  party  to  his 
councils,  brings  the  executive  authority  into  har- 
mony with  popular  sentiments."*  And  as  the  recog- 
nition of  this  doctrine,  in  England,  has  practically 
transferred  the  supreme  authority  of  the  state,  from 
the  crown,  to  Parliament  and  the  people, — so  in  the 
colonies  has  it  wrested  from  the  governor  and  from 
the  parent  state,  the  direction  of  colonial  affairs. 
And  again,  as  the  crown  has  gained  in  ease  and 
popularity  what  it  has  lost  in  power, — so  has   the 

'  See  Resolutions  of  the  Canadian  Parliament,  Sept.  3rd,  1841 ; 
Pari.  Paper,  1848,  No.  621. 

-  Despatch  of  Earl  Grey  to  Sir  John  Harvey,  Nov.  3rd,  1846  ; 
Pari.  Paper,  1848,  No.  621,  p.  8. 

3  Mills'  Colonial  Constitutions,  201,  205,  209,  &c.  The  only  free 
colonies  to  which  responsible  government  has  not  been  extended  are 
the  Cape  of  Good  Hope  and  Western  Australia. 

*  '  The  executive  council  is  a  removable  body,  in  analogy  to  the 
usage  prevailing  in  the  British  constitution '  .  .  .  '  it  being  underr 
stood  that  councillors  who  have  lost  the  confidence  of  the  local  legis- 
lature will  tender  their  resignations  to  the  governors.' — Bules  and 
Regulations  for  the  Colonial  Service,  ch.  ii. 


Responsible  Government.  369 

mother  country,  in  accepting,  to  the  full,  the  princi- 
ples of  local  self-government,  established  the  closest 
relations  of  amity  and  confidence  between  herself 
and  her  colonies. 

There  are  circumstances,  however,  in  which  the 
parallel  is  not  maintained.  The  Crown  conflicting 
and  Parliament  have  a  common  interest  in  of  Eng- 
the  welfare  of  their  country :  but  England  colonies. 
and  her  colonies  may  have  conflicting  interests,  or 
an  irreconcilable  policy.  The  crown  has,  indeed, 
reserved  its  veto  upon  the  acts  of  the  colonial  legis- 
latures :  but  its  practical  exercise  has  been  found 
scarcely  more  compatible  with  responsible  govern- 
ment in  the  colonies,  than  in  England.  Hence 
colonies  have  been  able  to  adopt  principles  of  legisla- 
tion inconsistent  with  the  policy  and  interests  of  the 
mother  country.  For  example,  after  England  had 
accepted  free  trade  as  the  basis  of  her  commercial 
policy,  Canada  adhered  to  protection ;  and  es- 
tablished a  tarifif  injurious  to  English  commerce.^ 
Such  laws  could  not  have  been  disallowed  by  the 
home  government  without  a  revival  of  the  conflicts 
and  discontents  of  a  former  period ;  and  in  defer- 
ence to  the  principles  of  self-government,  they  were 
reluctantly  confirmed. 

But  popular  principles,  in  colonial  government, 
have   not   rested   here.      While   enlarged  Demo- 

cratic  con- 

powers  have  been  intrusted  to  the   local  stitutions. 

'  Report  on  Colonial  Military  Expenditure,  1861.  Ev.  of  Mr. 
Gladstone,  3785 ;  MS.  Paper  by  the  Right  Hon.  Edw.  Ellice,  M.P. ; 
and  see  a  statement  of  difficulties  experienced  by  the  home  govern- 
ment in  endeavouring  to  restrain  New  Brunswick  in  the  granting  of 
bounties. — Earl  Grey's  Colonial  Policy,  i.  279. 
TOL.  III.  B  B 


370  Colonies. 

legislatures,  those  institutions  again  have  been  re- 
constituted upon  a  more  democratic  basis.  The 
Franchise  constitutiou  granted  to  Canada  in  1840,  on 
in  Canada.  ^^  reuniou  of  the  provinces,  was  popular, 
but  not  democratic.^  It  was  composed  of  a  legisla- 
tive council,  nominated  by  the  crown,  and  of  a 
representative  assembly,  to  which  freeholders  or 
roturiers  to  the  amount  of  500^.  were  eligible  as 
members.  The  franchise  comprised  40s.  freeholders, 
tl,  houseowners,  and  lOL  occupiers  :  but  has  since 
been  placed  upon  a  more  popular  basis  by  provincial 
acts.^ 

Democracy  made  more  rapid  progress  in  the  Aus- 
Austraiian  traliau  colouies.  In  1842,  a  new  constitu- 
tutions.  tion  was  granted  to  New  South  Wales, 
which,  departing  from  the  accustomed  model  of 
colonial  constitutions  in  other  parts  of  the  Empire, 
provided  for  the  legislation  of  the  colony  by  a  single 
chamber. 

The  constitution  of  an  upper  chamber  in  a  colonial 
Poiicyof  society,  without  an  aristocracy,  and  with  few 
chamber.  persous  of  high  attainments,  and  adequate 
leisure,  had  ever  been  a  difficult  problem.  Nomin- 
ated by  the  governor,  aud  consisting  mainly  of  his 
executive  officers,  it  had  failed  to  exercise  a  material 
influence  over  public  opinion ;  and  had  been  readily 
overborne  by  the  more  popular  assembly.  The  ex- 
periment was,  therefore,  tried  of  bringing  into  a 
single  chamber  the  aristocratic  and  democratic  ele- 
ments of  colonial  government.     It  was  hoped  that 

1  3  &  4  Vict.  c.  35 ;  Mills'  Colonial  Const.,  184. 
"  Canadian  Acts,  16  Vict.  c.  163 ;  22  Vict.  c.  82. 


Attstralian  Constitutions.  371 

tjminent  men  would  have  more  weight  in  the  deliber- 
ations of  the  popular  assembly,  than  sitting  apart 
and  exercising  an  impotent  veto.  The  experiment 
found  favour  with  experienced  statesmen  :  yet  it  can 
scarcely  be  doubted  that  it  was  a  concession  to  de- 
mocracy. Timely  delays  in  legislation, — a  cautious 
review  of  public  measures, — resistance  to  the  tyranny 
of  a  majority,  and  the  violence  of  a  faction, — the 
means  of  judicious  compromise, — were  wanting  in 
such  a  constitution.  The  majority  of  a  single 
chamber  was  absolute.^ 

In  1850,  it  became  expedient  to  divide  the  vast 
territories  of  New  South  Wales  into  two,  constitu- 

tionsof 

and  the  southern  portion  was  erected  mto  isoo. 
the  new  colony  of  Victoria.  This  opportunity  wa5 
taken  of  revising  the  constitutions  of  these  colonies, 
and  of  South  Australia  and  Van  Diemen's  Land.^ 
The  New  South  Wales  model  was  adhered  to  by 
Parliament ;  and  a  single  chamber  was  constituted 
in  each  of  these  colonies,  of  which  one-third  were 
nominated  by  the  crown,  and  two-thirds  elected 
under  a  franchise,  restricted  to  persons  holding  free- 
hold property  worth  100^.  and  10^.  householders  or 
leaseholders.  A  fixed  charge  was  also  imposed  upon 
the  colonial  revenues  for  the  civil  and  judicial  estab- 
lishments, and  for  religious  worship.  At  the  same 
time,  powers  were  conceded  to  the  governor  and 
legislative  council  of  each  colony,  with  the  assent 

^  The  relative  advantages  of  a  single  and  double  chamber  are 
fully  argued  by  Earl  Grey,  Colonial  Policy,  ii.  96,  and  by  Mr. 
Mills,  Colonial  Const.,  Introd.,  57. 

-  This  constitution  was  postponed,  as  regards  "Western  Australia, 
until  the  colony  should  undertake  to  pay  the  charges  of  its  civil 
governnaent. 

B  B  2 


372  Colonies, 

of  the  queen  in  council,  to  alter  every  part  of  the 
constitution  so  granted.^  The  experiment  of  a 
single  chamber  was  soon  abandoned  by  those  colonies 
themselves ;  while  the  principle  of  election  was 
introduced  into  the  legislative  councils.^  But  other- 
wise the  tendency  of  such  societies  was  naturally 
favourable  to  democracy;  and  in  a  few  years  the 
limited  franchise  was  changed,  in  nearly  all  of  these 
colonies,  for  universal  or  manhood  suffrage  and  vote 
by  ballot.^  It  was  open  to  the  queen  in  council  to 
disallow  these  laws,  or  for  Parliament  itself  to  inter- 
pose and  suspend  them :  ■*  but  in  deference  to  the 
principle  of  self-government,  these  critical  changes 
were  allowed  to  come  into  operation. 

In  1852,  a  representative  constitution,  with  two 
New  zea-  chambors,  was  introduced,  after  some  delay, 
cai  of*^  into  New  Zealand ;  ^  and,  about  the  same 
Good  Hope,    period,  into  the  Cape  of  G-ood  Hope.^ 

To  conclude  this  rapid  summary  of  colonial  liber- 

»  13  &  14  Vict.  c.  59 ;  Earl  Grey's  Colonial  Policy,  i.  App.  422  ;  ii 
88-111 ;  Mills,  291  ;  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  eviii.  634;  cix.  1384,  &c 

2  New  South  Wales  Colonial  'Act,  17  Vict.  c.  41;  Mills,  296: 
Victoria  Colonial  Act,  March  25, 1854  ;  Mills,  309  ;  South  Australia 
1854 ;  Mills,  316  ;  Van  Diemen's  Land  Colonial  Act,  18  Vict.  c.  18 
Mills,   326.     Western  Australia  is  the  only  colony  now  haying  a 
single  chamber. 

3  Colonial  Acts,  Victoria,  Nov.  24th,  1857,  21  Vict.  No.  33  ;. 
South  Australia,  Jan.  27th,  1858,  21  Vict.  No.  12;  New  South 
Wales,_  Nov.  24th,  1858,  22  Vict.  No.  22.  In  New  Zealand  tho 
franchise  has  been  given  to  the  gold-miners. 

*  Colonial  Acts  for  such  purposes  were  required  to  be  laid  before 
Parliament,  for  thirty  days,  before  her  Majesty's  pleasure  should  bo 
signified  in  regard  to  them. 

^  15  &  16  Vict.  c.  72.  A  previous  Act  had  been  passed  with  this 
object  in  1846,  but  its  operation  was  suspended  in  the  following, 
year.— Earl  Grey's  Colonial  Policy,  ii.  153-158  ;  Mills,  335  ;  Hans. 
Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  cxxi.  922. 

"  Earl  Grey,  ii.  226-234,  App.  C.  and  D. ;  Cape  of  Good  Hope 
Papers,  presented  by  command,  Feb.  5th,  1850  ;  Mills,  151. 


Colonial  Democracy.  373 

ties, — it    must    be   added  that  the  colonies   have 
further    enjoyed    municipal   institutions,^  other 
a   tree  press,''  and  religious  freedom  and  liberties, 
equality.     No  liberty  or  franchise  prized  by  English- 
men at  home,  has  been  withheld  from  their  fellow- 
countrymen  in  distant  lands. 

Thus,  by  rapid  strides,  have  the  most  considerable 
dependencies  of  the  British  crown  ad-  coioniai 
vanced,  through  successive  stages  of  '^e^oc^^y- 
political  liberty,  until  an  ancient  monarchy  has 
become  the  parent  of  democratic  republics,  in  all 
parts  of  the  globe.  The  constitution  of  the  United 
States  is  scarcely  so  democratic  as  that  of  Canada, 
or  the  Australian  colonies.  The  president's  fixed 
tenure  of  office,  and  large  executive  powers, — the 
independent  position  and  authority  of  the  Senate, — 
and  the  control  of  the  supreme  court, — are  checks 
upon  the  democracy  of  congress.^  But  in  these 
colonies  the  majority  of  the  democratic  assembly, 
for  the  time  being,  are  absolute  masters  of  the 
colonial  government :  they  can  overcome  the  resist- 
ance of  the  legislative  council,  and  dictate  condi- 
tions to  the  governor,  and  indirectly  to  the  parent 
state.  This  transition  from  a  state  of  control  and 
pupilage,  to  that  of  unrestrained  freedom,  may  have 
been  too  precipitate.  Society, — particularly  in 
Australia,  —  had  scarcely  had  time  to  prepare 
itself  for  the  successful  trial  of  so  free  a  represen- 
tation.    The  settlers  of  a  new  country  were  suddenly 

1  Earl   Grey's  Colonial  Policy,  i.  32,  235,  437 ;  ii.  327 ;  Mills 
185,  &c. ;  Merivale,  Colonisation,  1861,  661-656. 

2  Earl  Grey's  Colonial  Policy,  i.  29. 

3  Do  Tocqueville,  i.  p.  143,  151,  179. 


374  Colonies. 

intrusted  with  uncontrolled  power,  before  education  ^ 
property,  traditions  and  usage  had  given  stability 
to  public  opinion.  Nor  were  they  trained  to  free- 
dom, like  their  English  brethren,  by  many  enno- 
bling struggles,  and  the  patient  exercise  of  public 
virtues.  But  such  a  transition,  more  or  less  rapid, 
was  the  inevitable  consequence  of  responsible 
government,  coupled  with  the  power  given  to 
colonial  assemblies,  of  reforming  their  own  consti- 
tutions. The  principle  of  self-government  once 
recognised,  has  been  carried  out  without  reserve  or 
hesitation.  Hitherto  there  have  been  many  failures 
and  discouragements  in  the  experiment  of  colonial 
democracy  :  yet  the  political  future  of  these  thriv- 
ing communities  affords  far  more  ground  for  hope 
than  for  despondency. 

England  ventured  to  tax  her  colonies,  and  lost 
Colonies  them :  she  endeavoured  to  rule  them  from 
become         Downing'  Street,  and  provoked  disaffection 

affiliated  °  '  ^ 

states.  and   revolt.     At  last,  she   gave  freedom, 

and  found  national  sympathy  and  contentment. 
But  in  the  meantime,  her  colonial  dependencies 
have  grown  into  affiliated  states.  The  tie  which 
binds  them  to  her,  is  one  of  sentiment  rather  than 
authority.  Commercial  privileges,  on  either  side,^ 
have  been  abandoned:  transportation, — for  which 
some  of  the  colonies  were  founded,  — has  been  given 
up  :  patronage  has  been  surrendered,  the  disposal  of 
public  lands  waived  by  the  crown,  and  political 
dominion  virtually  renounced.  In  short,  their  de- 
pendence has  become  little  more  than  nominal, 
except  for  purposes  of  military  defence. 


Colonial  Defences.  375 

We  have  seen  how,  in  the  earlier  history  of  the 
colonies,  they  strove  to  defend  themselves.  Mmtaiyde- 
But  during  the  prolonged  hostilities  of  the  cS^. 
French  revolutionary  war,  assaults  upon  our  colo- 
nies naturally  formed  part  of  the  tactics  of  the 
enemy,  which  were  met,  on  our  part,  by  costly  naval 
and  military  armaments.  And  after  the  peace, 
England  continued  to  garrison  her  colonies  with 
large  military  forces,— wholly  paid  by  herself, — and 
to  construct  fortifications,  requiring  still  larger 
garrisons.  Wars  were  undertaken  against  the 
natives,  as  in  the  Cape  of  Grood  Hope  and  New 
Zealand, — of  which  England  bore  all  the  cost,  and 
the  colonies  gained  all  the  profit.  English  soldiers 
have  further  performed  the  services  of  colonial 
police.  Instead  of  taxing  her  colonies,  England 
has  suffered  herself  to  be  taxed  heavily  on  their 
account.  The  annual  military  expenditure,  on  ac- 
count of  the  colonies,  ultimately  reached  3,225,081^., 
of  which  1, 7 15,246L  was  incurred  for  free  colonies, 
and  1,509,835^.  for  military  garrisons  and  depend- 
encies, maintained  chiefly  for  imperial  purposes.^ 
Many  of  the  colonies  have  already  contributed  to- 
wards the  maintenance  of  British  troops,  and  have 
further  raised  considerable  bodies  of  militia  and 
volunteers :  but  Parliament  has  recently  pronounced 
it  to  be  just  that  the  colonies  which  enjoy  self- 
government,  should  undertake  the  responsibility  and 
cost  of  their  own  military  defence.^     To  carry  this 

*  Eeport  of  Committee  on  Colonial  Military  Expenditure,  1861. 
2  Eeport  of  Committee  on  Colonial  Military  Expenditure,  1861, 
and  Evidence :  Kesolution  of  Commons,   March  4,   1862. — Hans. 


37^  Colonies. 

policy  into  effect  must  be  the  work  of  time.  But 
whenever  it  may  be  effected,  the  last  material  bond 
of  connection  with  the  colonies  will  have  been 
severed ;  and  colonial  states,  acknowledging  the 
honorary  sovereignty  of  England,  and  fully  armed 
for  self-defence, — as  well  against  herself  as  others, — 
will  have  grown  out  of  the  dependencies  of  the 
British  Empire.  They  will  still  look  to  her,  in  time 
of  war,  for  at  least  naval  protection  ;  and,  in  peace, 
they  will  continue  to  imitate  her  laws  and  institu- 
tions, and  to  glory  in  the  proud  distinction  of 
iBritish  citizenship.  On  her  part,  England  may  well 
be  prouder  of  the  vigorous  freedom  of  her  pros- 
perous sons,  than  of  a  hundred  provinces  subject  to 
the  iron  rule  of  British  pro-consuls.  And,  should 
the  sole  remaining  ties  of  kindred,  affection,  and 
honour  be  severed,  she  will  reflect,  with  just  exult- 
ation, that  her  dominion  ceased,  not  in  oppression 
and  bloodshed,  but  in  the  expansive  energies  of 
freedom,  and  the  hereditary  capacity  of  her  manly 
offspring  for  the  privileges  of  self-government. 

Other  parts  of  the  British  Empire  have, — from  the 
Dependen-  couditious  of  their  occupatiou,  the  relations 
fOTseif-^*'*^  of  the  state  to  the  native  population,  and 
government,  ^^.j^gj.  circumstauces, — been  unable  to  par- 
ticipate in  the  free  institutions  of  the  more  favoured 
colonies  ;^  but  they  have  largely  shared  in  that  spirit 
of  enlightened   liberality,  which,  during  the  last 

Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  clxxv.  1032 ;  Earl  Grey's  Colonial  Policy,  i.  265  ;  Mr. 
Adderley's  Letter  to  Mr.  Disraeli  on  the  Kelations  of  England  with 
the  Colonies,  1861. 

*  Viz.,  India,  Malta,  Gibraltar,  Ceylon,  Hong  Kong,  St.  Helena, 
Falklands,  Labuan,  Sierra  Leone,  Gambia,  Gold  Coast. 


hidia,  377 

twenty  years,  has  distinguished  the  administration 
of  colonial  affairs. 

Of  all  the  dependencies  of  the  British  crown,  India 
is  the  most  considerable  in  territory,  in  India, 
population,  in  revenue,  and  in  military  resources. 
It  is  itself  a  great  empire.  Originally  acquired  and 
governed  by  a  trading  company,  England  was  re- 
sponsible for  its  administration  no  further  than  was 
implied  in  the  charters  and  Acts  of  Parliament,  by 
which  British  subjects  were  invested  with  sovereignty 
over  distant  regions.^     Trade  was  the  first.  The  East 

India  Com* 

— dominion  the  secondary  object  of  the  pany. 
-company.  Early  in  the  reign  of  Greorge  III.  their 
territories  had  become  so  extended,  that  Lord  Chat- 
ham conceived  the  scheme  of  claiming  them  as 
dominions  of  the  crown.'^  This  great  scheme,  how- 
ever, dwindled,  in  the  hands  of  his  colleagues,  into 
an  agreement  that  the  company  should  pay  400;000^. 
a  year,  as  the  price  of  their  privileges.^  This  tri- 
bute was  not  long  enjoyed,  for  the  company,  im- 
poverished by  perpetual  wars,  andmal-administration, 
fell  into  financial  difficulties;  and  in  1773,  were  re- 
leased from  this  obligation.^  And  in  this  year. 
Parliament,  for  the  first  time,  undertook  to  regulate 
the  constitution  of  the  government  of  India.^  The 
court  of  directors,consisting  of  twenty-four  members, 


*  The  first  charter  was  granted  in  1600;  the  first  Act  concern- 
ing the  East  India  Company  was  passed  in  1698,  9  &  10  Will. 
III.  c.  44. 

2  Lord  Mahon's  Hist,,  v.  262 ;  Chatham  Corr,,  iv.  264. 

3  7  Geo.  III.  c.  57  ;  9  Geo.  III.  c.  24;  Pari.  Hist.,xvi.  350 ;  Walp. 
Mem.,  ii.  394,  427,  449 ;  iii.  39-57. 

*  13  Geo.  III.  c.  63.  *  iiic^.  c.  64. 


378  Colo7iies. 

elected  by  the  proprietors  of  India  stock,  and  vir- 
tually independent  of  the  government,  became  the 
home  authority,  by  whom  the  governor-general  was 
appointed,  and  to  whom  alone  he  was  responsible. 
An  Asiatic  empire  was  still  intrusted  to  a  company, 
having  an  extensive  civil  and  military  organisation, 
making  wars  and  conquests,  negotiating  treaties, 
and  exercising  uncontrolled  dominion.  A  trading 
company  had  grown  into  a  corporate  emperor.  The 
genius  of  Clive  and  Warren  Hastings  had  acquired 
the  empire  of  the  Great  Mogul. 

But  power  exercised  by  irresponsible  and  despotic 
Abuses  of  rulers  was  naturally  abused  ;  and  in  1773, 
mSSation,  ^^^  again  in  1780,  the  directors  were  placed 
i<  81-82.  under  the  partial  control  of  a  secretary  of 
state.^  Soon  afterwards  some  of  the  most  glaring 
excesses  of  Indian  misrule  were  forced  upon  the 
notice  of  Parliament.^  English  statesmen  became 
sensible  that  the  anomalies  of  a  government,  so 
constituted,  could  no  longer  be  endured.  It  was 
not  fit  that  England  should  suffer  her  subjects  to 
practise  the  iniquities  of  Asiatic  rule,  without  effec- 
tive responsibility  and  control.  On  Mr.  Fox  and 
the  coalition  ministry  first  devolved  the  task  of 
Mr.  Fox's  providing  against  the  continued  oppression 
1783.  '  and  misrule,  which  recent  inquiries  had 
exposed.  They  grappled  boldly  with  the  evils  which 
demanded  a  remedy.  Satisfied  that  the  government 
of  an  empire  could  not  be  confided  with  safety  or 

*  Burke's  Speech,  "Works,  iv.  115. 

2  See  Debates  Feb.  1st  and  12th,  and  May  8th,  1781 ;  April  15th, 
1782;  Pari.  Hist.  xxi.  1162,  1182;  xxii.  200,  1275;  Eeports  of 
Secret  and  Select  Committees,  1782  and  1783. 


Mr.  Foxs  India  Bill.  2>79 

honour  to  a  commercial  company,  they  proposed  at 
once  to  transfer  it  to  another  body.  But  to  whom 
could  such  a  power  be  intrusted?  Not  to  the 
crown,  whose  influence  they  had  already  denounced 
as  exorbitant :  not  to  any  department  of  the  ex- 
ecutive government,  which  could  become  accessory 
to  Parliamentary  corruption.  The  company  had 
been,  in  great  measure,  independent  of  the  crown 
and  of  the  ministers  of  the  day ;  and  the  power  which 
had  been  abused,  they  now  proposed  to  vest  in  an 
independent  board.  This  important  body  was  to 
consist  of  seven  commissioners  appointed,  in  the 
first  instance,  by  Parliament,  for  a  term  of  four  years, 
and  ultimately  by  the  crown.  The  leading  concerns 
of  the  company  were  to  be  managed  by  eight  assist- 
ants, appointed  first  by  Parliament,  and  afterwards 
by  the  proprietors  of  East  India  stock.  ^  It  was  a 
bold  and  hazardous  measure,  on  which  Mr.  Fox  and 
his  colleagues  staked  their  power.  Conceived  in  a 
spirit  of  wisdom  and  humanity,  it  recognised  the 
duty  of  the  state  to  redress  the  wrongs,  and  secure 
the  future  welfare  of  a  distant  empire ;  yet  was  it 
open  to  objections  which  a  fierce  party  contest  dis- 
coloured with  exaggeration.  The  main  objections 
urged  against  the  bill  were  these  :  that  it  violated 
the  chartered  rights  of  the  company, — that  it  in- 
creased the  influence  of  the  crown — and  that  it  in- 
vested the  coalition  party,  then  having  a  Parlia- 
mentary majority,  with  a  power  superior  to  the 
crown  itself.  As  regards  the  first  objection,  it  was 
vain  to  contend  that  Parliament  might  not  lawfully 
>  Mr.  Fox's  Speech,  Not.  IStli,  1783  ;  Pari.  Hist.,  xxiii.  1187. 


380  Colonies, 

dispossess  the  company  of  their  dominion  over  mil- 
lions of  men,  wMcli  they  had  disgraced  by  fraud, 
rapine,  oppression,  cruelty,  and  bloodshed.  They 
had  clearly  forfeited  the  political  powers  intrusted 
to  them  for  the  public  good.  A  solemn  trust,  having 
been  flagrantly  violated,  might  justly  be  revoked. 
But  had  they  forfeited  their  commercial  privileges  ? 
They  were  in  difficulties  and  debt :  their  affairs  were 
in  the  utmost  confusion :  the  grossest  mismanage- 
ment was  but  too  certainly  proved.  But  such  evils 
in  a  commercial  company,  however  urgently  needing 
correction,  scarcely  justified  the  forfeiture  of  esta- 
blished rights.  The  two  last  objections  were  plainly 
contradictory.  The  measure  could  not  increase  the 
influence  of  the  crown,  and  at  the  same  time  exalt  a 
party  above  it.  The  former  was,  in  truth,  wholly 
untenable,  and  was  relinquished;  while  the  king, 
the  opposition,  the  friends  of  the  company,  and  the 
country,  made  common  cause  in  maintaining  the 
latter.  And  assuredly  the  weakest  point  wac  chosen 
for  attack.  The  bill  nominated  the  commissioners, 
exclusively  from  the  ministerial  party ;  and  in- 
trusted them  with  all  the  power  and  patronage  of 
India,  for  a  term  of  four  years.  At  a  time  when 
corrupt  influence  was  so  potent,  in  the  councils  of 
the  state,  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  the  commis- 
sioners would  have  been  able  to  promote  the  poli- 
tical interests  of  their  own  party.  To  add  to  their 
weight,  they  were  entitled  to  sit  in  Parliament. 
Already  the  parliamentary  influence  of  the  company 
had  aroused  jealousy ;  and  its  concentration  in  a 
powerful    and   organised    party   naturally    excited 


Mr,  Pitt's  hidia  Bill,  z'^ i 

alarm.  However  exaggerated  by  party  violence,  it 
was  unquestionably  a  well-founded  objection,  which 
ought  to  have  been  met  and  counteracted.  It  is 
true  that  vacancies  were  to  be  filled  up  by  the  crown, 
and  that  the  appointment  of  the  commissioners  was 
during  good  behaviour  ;  but,  practically,  they  would 
have  enjoyed  an  independent  authority  for  four 
years.  It  was  right  to  wrest  power  from  a  body 
which  should  never  have  been  permitted  to  exercise 
it,  and  by  whom  it  had  been  flagrantly  abused :  but 
it  was  wrong  to  constitute  the  new  government  an 
instrument  of  party,  uncontrolled  by  the  crown,  and 
beyond  the  immediate  reach  of  that  parliamentary 
responsibility  which  our  free  constitution  recog- 
nises as  necessary  for  the  proper  exercise  of  authority. 
The  error  was  fatal  to  the  measure  itself,  and  to  the 
party  by  whom  it  was  committed.^ 

Mr.  Fox's  scheme  having  been  overthrown,  Mr. 
Pitt  proceeded  to  frame  a  measure,  in  which  Mr.  Pitt's 

-^  '  India  BiU, 

he  dexterously  evaded  all  the  difficulties  i784. 
under  which  his  rival  had  fallen.  He  left  the  com- 
pany in  possession  of  their  large  powers :  but  sub- 
jected them  to  a  board  of  control  representing  the 
crown.2  The  company  were  now  accountable  to 
ministers,  in  their  rule  ;  and  ministers,  if  ^^  ^^^^^^ 
they  suffered  wrong  to  be  done,  were  re-  government. 
sponsible  to  Parliament.  So  far  the  bheoiy  of  this 
measure   was   good:  but  power   and  responsibility 

>  Su^ra,  Vol.  I.  67 ;  Pari.  Hist.,  xxiii.  1224,  1255,  &c.  ;  Burke's 
Works,  iv.  1  ;  Adolphus'  Hist.,  iv.  34-65 ;  Massey's  Hist.,  iii. 
196-218;  Fox,  Mem.,  ii.  212-221  ;  Lord  J.  Kussell's  Life  of  Fox,, 
ii.  24-48 ;  Lord  Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt,  i.  138. 

2  24  Geo.  m.  c.  25. 


382  Colonies, 

were  divided;  and  distracted  councils,  an  infirm 
executive,  and  a  cumbrous  and  perplexed  adminis- 
tration, were  scarcely  to  be  avoided  in  a  double 
government.^  The  administration  of  Indian  affairs 
came  frequently  under  the  review  of  Parliament :  ^ 
but  the  system  of  double  or  divided  government  was 
continued,  on  each  successive  renewal  of  the  privi- 
Later  legcs  of  the  Company.     In  1833,  the  first 

measures,  great  chaugo  was  efiected  in  the  position 
of  the  company.  Up  to  this  time,  they  had  enjoyed 
the  exclusive  trade  with  China,  and  other  commercial 
privileges.  This  monopoly  was  now  discontinued ; 
and  they  ceased  to  be  a  trading  company ;  but  their 
dominion  over  India  was  confirmed  for  a  further 
period  of  twenty  years.^  The  right  of  Parliament, 
however,  to  legislate  for  India  was  then  reserved. 
It  was  the  last  periodical  renewal  of  the  powers  af 
India  BUI  the  compauy.  In  1853,  significant  changes 
1853.  were  made :  their  powers  being  merely  con- 

tinued until  Parliament  should  otherwise  provide ; 
and  their  territories  being  held  in  trust  for  the 
crown.  The  Court  of  Directors  was  reconstituted, 
being  henceforth  composed  of  twelve  elected  mem- 
bers, and  six  nominees  of  the  crown.  At  the  sanae 
time,  the  coimcil  of  the  Grovernor-General,  in  India, 
was  enlarged,  and  invested  with  a  more  legislative 
character.  The  government  of  India  being  thus 
drawn  into  closer  connection  with  ministers,  they 
met  objections  to  the  increase  of  patronage,  which 

1  Mr.  Fox's  Speech,  Pari.  Hist.,  xxiv.  1122;  Fox,  Mem.,  ii.  254  ; 
Debates  on  India  bill  of  1858,  joassim. 

2  28  Geo.  Ill,  c.  8;  33  Geo.  III.  e.  52 ;  53  Geo.  III.  c.  155. 
«  3  &  4  Will.  IV.  c.  85. 


Transfer  of  India  to  the  Crown.       383 

had  been  fatal  to  Mr.  Fox's  scheme,  by  opening  the 
civil  and  medical  services  to  competition.^  This 
measure  prepared  the  way  for  a  more  complete  iden- 
tity between  the  executive  administration  of  Eng- 
land and  of  India.  It  had  a  short  and  painful  trial. 
The  mutiny  of  the  native  army,  in  1857,  disclosed 
the  perils  and  responsibilities  of  England,  and  the 
necessity  of  establishing  a  single  and  supreme 
authority. 

The  double  government  of  Mr.  Pitt  was  at  length 
condemned :  the  powers  and  territories  of  oovem- 
the    company    were    transferred    to    the  india 

/-\  11-1  •  /.    T     T       transferred 

Queen ;   and  the  administration  of  India  to  the 

crown, 

was  intrusted  to  a  Secretary  of  State,  and  isss. 
Council.  But  this  great  change  could  not  be  ac- 
complished without  a  compromise ;  and  of  the 
fifteen  members  of  the  council,  seven  were  elected 
by  the  Board  of  Directors,  and  eight  appointed  by 
the  crown.  And  again,  with  a  view  to  restrict  the 
state  patronage,  cadetships  in  the  engineers  and 
artillery  were  thrown  open  to  competition. ^ 

The  transfer  of  India  to  the  crown  was  followed 
by  a  vigorous  administration  of  its  vast  subsequent 
dominions.  Its  army  was  amalgamated  atoiTnis- 
with  that  of  England :  ^  the  constitution  of  *^^*^°°' 
the  council  in  India  was  placed  upon  a  wider  basis  :  ^ 
the  courts  of  judicature  were  remodelled  \^  the 
civil  service  enlarged  ;^  and  the  exhausted  revenues 

M6  &  17  Vict.  c.  95.  2  21  &  22  Vict.  c.  106. 

3  23  &  24  Vict.  c.  100  (discontinuing  a  separate  European  force 
in  India) ;  24  &  25  Viet.  e.  74;  and  Pari.  Papers,  1860,  Nos.  364, 
471,  &c. 

*  24  &  25  Vict.  c.  67.  *  Md.,  c.  104.  «  Ihid.,  c.  54. 


3^4  Colo7iies. 

of  the  country  regenerated.  To  an  empire  of  sub- 
jugated states,  and  Asiatic  races,  self-government 
was  plainly  impossible.  But  it  has  already  profited 
by  European  civilisation  and  statesmanship ;  and 
while  necessarily  denied  freedom,  its  rulers  are 
guided  by  the  principles  upon  which  free  states  are 
governed  ;  and  its  interests  are  protected  by  a  free 
English  Parliament,  a  vigilant  press,  and  an  en- 
lightened and  humane  people. 

Beyond  these  narrow  isles,  England  has  won. 
Freedom  indeed,  a  vast  and  glorious  empire.  In 
Brifish  ^^  history  of  the  world,  no  other  state 
empire.  j^^^  kuowu  how  to  govcm  territories  so 
extended  and  remote, — and  races  of  men  so  diverse ; 
giving  to  her  own  kindred  colonies  the  widest 
liberty, — and  ruling,  with  enlightened  equity,  de- 
pendencies unqualified  for  freedom.  To  the  Eoman^ 
Virgil  proudly  sang, 

*  Tu  regere  imperio  populos,  Eomane,  memento : 
Hse  tibi  erunt  artes.' 

To  the  Englishman  may  it  not  be  said  with  even 
juster  pride,  'having  won  freedom  for  thyself,  and 
used  it  wisely,  thou  hast  given  it  to  thy  children^ 
who  have  peopled  the  earth ;  and  thou  hast  exer- 
cised dominion  with  justice  and  humanity !  * 


Improved  Spirit  of  L  egislalion.       385 


CHAPTER  XVIII 

IMPROYED  SPmiT  OF  LEGISLATION  COINCIDENT  "SVITH  LIBERTY  : — 
ADMINISTRATION  OF  JUSTICE  : — MITIGATION  OF  THE  CRIMINAL  CODE  : 
— CAPITAL  AND  SECONDARY  PXTNISHMENTS  : — PRISONS  : — POLICE  : — 
THE  POOR  LA"V\rS  : — LUNATICS  : — PROVISIONS  FOR  THE  SOCIAL  "WEL- 
FARE  OF   THE   people: — POPULAR    EDUCATION: — COMMERCIAL   AND 

FINANCIAL   POLICY  : ACTIVITY   OP  PARLIAMENT  SINCE  THE  REFORM 

ACT : — CONCLUSION. 

We  have  now  surveyed  tlie  progress  of  freedom  and 
popular  influence,  in  all  the  institutions  of  improved 
England.  Everywhere  we  have  seen  the  Kem 
rights  and  liberties  of  the  people  assured ;  i«g^^'^°°- 
and  closer  relations  established  between  the  state 
and  the  community.  The  liberal  spirit  of  general 
legislation  has  kept  pace  with  this  remarkable  deve- 
lopment of  constitutional  liberty.  While  the  basis 
of  power  was  narrow,  rulers  had  little  sympathy  with 
the  people.  The  spirit  of  their  rule  was  hard  and 
selfish :  favouring  the  few  at  the  expense  of  the 
many:  protecting  privileges  and  abuses  by  which 
the  governing  classes  profited :  but  careless  of  the 
welfare  of  the  governed.  Eesponsibility  and  popular 
control  gradually  forced  upon  them  larger  views  of 
the  public  interests ;  and  more  consideration  for  the 
claims  of  all  classes  to  participate  in  the  benefits  of 
enlightened  government.  With  freedom  there  grew 
a  stronger  sense  of  duty  in  rulers — more  enlighten- 
TOL.  III.  c  0 


386  Progress  of  Legislation. 

ment  and  humanity  among  the  people  :  wiser  laws, 
and  a  milder  policy.  The  asperities  of  power  were 
tempered ;  and  the  state  was  governed  in  the  spirit 
which  society  approved. 

This  improved  spirit  has  displayed  itself  through- 
out the  wide  range  of  modern  legislation :  but,  in 
passing  beyond  the  strict  limits  of  constitutional 
history,  we  must  content  ourselves  with  a  rapid 
glance  at  some  of  its  more  remarkable  illustrations. 

No  example  more  aptly  illustrates  the  altered 
Emoiu-         relations  of  rulers  to  the  people,  than  the 

ments  of  . 

office.  revision  of  official  emoluments.     Ministers 

once  grew  rich  upon  the  gains  of  office ;  and  pro- 
vided for  their  relatives  by  monstrous  sinecures,  and 
appointments  egregiously  overpaid.  To  grasp  a 
great  estate  out  of  the  public  service,  was  too  often 
their  first  thought.  Families  were  founded,  titles 
endowed,  and  broken  fortunes  repaired,  at  the 
public  expense.  It  was  asked  what  an  office  was 
worth :  not  what  services  were  to  be  rendered. 
This  selfish  and  dishonest  system  perished  under 
exposure  :  but  it  proved  a  tedious  and  unthankful 
labour  to  bring  its  abuses  to  the  light  of  day.  In- 
quiries were  commenced  early  in  the  present  cen- 
tury; but  were  followed  by  few  practical  results. 
At  that  time,  '  all  abuses  were  freeholds,'  ^  which 
the  government  did  not  venture  to  invade.  Mr. 
Joseph  Hume,  foremost  among  the  guardians  of 
public  interests,  afterwards  applied  his  patient  in- 
dustry and  fearless  public  spirit  to  this  work ;  and, 

'  This  happy  phrase  is  assigned  to  Richard  Bentley,  son  of  Dr. 
Bentley.— Walpole's  Mem.,  ii.  391. 


Improved  Spirit  of  L egislation.        387 

unruffled  by  discouragements  and  ridicule,  he  lived 
to  see  its  accomplishment.  Soon  after  the  Eeform 
Act,  ministers  of  state  accepted  salaries  scarcely 
equal  to  the  charges  of  office  :  ^  sinecures  and  rever- 
sions were  abolished :  offices  discontinued  or  con- 
solidated ;  and  the  scale  of  official  emoluments 
revised,  and  apportioned  to  the  duties  performed, 
throughout  the  public  service.  The  change  attested 
a  higher  sense  of  duty  in  ministers,  and  increased 
responsibility  to  public  opinion. 

The  abuses  in  the  administration  of  justice,  which 
had  been  suffered  to  grow  and  flourish  Adminis- 
without  a  check,  illustrate  the  inert  and  justice, 
stagnant  spirit  of  the  eighteenth  century.  The 
noble  principles  of  English  law  had  been  expounded 
by  eminent  judges,  and  applied  to  the  varying  cir- 
cumstances of  society,  until  they  had  expanded  into 
a  comprehensive  system  of  jm'isprudence,  entitled 
to  respect  and  veneration.  But  however  admirable 
its  principles,  its  practice  had  departed  from  the 
simplicity  of  former  times,  and,  by  manifold  defects, 
went  far  to  defeat  the  ends  of  justice.  Lawyers, 
ever  following  precedents,  were  blind  to  principles. 
Legal  fictions,  technicalities,  obsolete  forms,  intri- 
cate rules  of  procedm'e,  accumulated.  Fine  intel- 
lects were  wasted  on  the  narrow  subtilties  of  special 
pleading;  and  clients  won  or  lost  causes, — like  a 

^  Eeports  on  Sinecure  Offices,  1807,  1810-12,  and  1834;  De- 
bates on  Offices  in  Reversion  Bill,  1807,  1808;  Hans.  Deb.,  Ist  Ser., 
ix.  178,  1073,  «&c.;  x.  194,  870,  &e. ;  Eomilly's  Life,  ii.  219,  302; 
iii.  9  ;  Twiss's  Life  of  Lord  Eldon,  ii.  116,  225  ;  Reports  of  Commons 
on  offices  held  by  Members,  1830-31,  No.  322;  1833,  No.  671 ;  Re- 
port on  Miscellaneous  Expenditure,  1847-48,  No.  543 ;  and  on  Pub- 
lic Offices,  1856,  No.  368. 

c  c  2 


o 


SS  Progress  of  Legislation. 


game  of  chess, — not  by  the  force  of  truth  and  right, 
but  by  the  skill  and  cunning  of  the  players.  Heart- 
breaking delays  and  ruinous  costs  were  the  lot  of 
suitors.  Justice  was  dilatory,  expensive,  uncertain, 
and  remote.  To  the  rich  it  was  a  costly  lottery :  to 
the  poor  a  denial  of  right,  or  certain  ruin.  The 
class  who  profited  most  by  its  dark  mysteries,  were 
the  lawyers  themselves.  A  suitor  might  be  reduced 
to  beggary  or  madness  :  but  his  advisers  revelled  in 
the  chicane  and  artifices  of  a  life-long  suit,  and  grew 
rich.  Out  of  a  multiplicity  of  forms  and  processes 
arose  numberless  fees  and  well-paid  offices.  Many 
subordinate  functionaries,  holding  sinecure  or  super- 
fluous appointments,  enjoyed  greater  emoluments 
than  the  judges  of  the  court ;  and  upon  the  luckless 
suitors,  again,  fell  the  charge  of  these  egTegious  es- 
tablishments. If  complaints  were  made,  they  were 
repelled  as  the  promptings  of  ignorance :  if  amend- 
ments of  the  law  were  proposed,  they  were  resisted 
as  innovations.  To  question  the  perfection  of  Eng- 
lish jurisprudence  was  to  doubt  the  wisdom  of  our 
ancestors, — a  political  heresy,  which  could  expect 
no  toleration. 

The  delays  of  the  Court  of  Chancery,  in  the  time 
Delays  of  ^^  Lord  Eldou,  woro  a  frequent  cause  of 
of  ch^*^  complaint ;  and  formed  the  subject  of 
^^^"  parliamentary   inquiry   in    both    Houses.^ 

In  1813,  a  vice-chancellor  was  appointed,  to  expe- 
dite the  business  of  the  court :  but  its  complex  and 
dilatory  procedure  remained  without  improvement. 
Complaints  continued  to  be  made,  by  Mr.  Michael 

'  Eomilly's  Life,  ii.  368,  386,  392;  iii.  13,  &c.;  Twias's  Life  of 
Lord  Eldon,  ii.  167,  199. 


Law  Reform.  389 

Angelo  Taylor,  Mr.  Williams,  and  others,  until,  in 
1825,  a  commission  was  appointed  to  inquire  into 
the  administration  of  justice  in  that  court. ^ 

In  1828,  Mr.  Brougham  exposed  the  complicated 
abuses  of  the  courts  of  common  law,  and  Defects 
the  law  of  real  property.      His  masterly  common 
speech,  of  six  hours,  displayed  the  com-  courts. 
bined  powers  of  the  philosophic  jurist,  the  practised 
lawyer,  the  statesman,  and  the  orator.*     Suggesting 
most  of  the  law  reforms  which   have  since   been 
carried  into  effect,  and  some  not  yet  accomplished, 
it  stands  a  monument  to  his  fame  as  a  lawgiver.^ 
Commissions  of  inquiry  were  immediately  appointed ; 
and,  when  their  investigations  were  completed,  a 
new  era  of  reform  and  renovation  was  commenced. 
Thenceforth,  the  amendment  of  the  law  j^^re- 
was  pursued  in  a  spirit  of  earnestness  and  *°™^* 
vigour.     Judges  and  law  officers  no  longer  discoun- 
tenanced it :  but  were  themselves  foremost  in  the 
cause  of  law  reform.     Lord  Brougham,  on  the  wool- 
sack, was  able  to  give  effect  to  some  of  his  own  che- 
rished schemes;  and  never  afterwards  faltered   in 
the  work.     Succeeding  chancellors  followed  in  his 
footsteps;  and  Lord  Denman,  Lord  Campbell,  Sir 
Eichard  Bethell,  and  other  eminent  jurists,  laboured 
successfully  in  the  same  honourable  field  of  legisla- 
tion.    The  work  was  slow  and  toilsome, — beset  with 
many  difficulties, — and  generally  unthankful :  but 

»  Eomilly's  Life,  ii.  474,  486,  567 ;  in.  321,  et  seq. 

"  Feb.  7th,  1828,  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  xviii.  127  ;  Lord 
Brougham's  Speeches,  ii.  311. 

3  Acts  and  Bills  of  Lord  Brougham,  by  Sir  Eardley  Wilmot, 
Intr.  XV.,  ct  seq. ;  Ivi.  ei  scq. ;  Ixxx. ;  Speech  of  Lord  Brougham 
on  Law  Eeform,  May  12th,  1848,  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xcviii. 
877. 


390  Progress  of  Legislation. 

it  was  accomplished.  The  procedure  of  the  court 
of  Chancery  was  simplified :  its  judicial  establish- 
ment enlarged  and  remodelled :  its  offices  regulated. 
Its  delays  were  in  great  measure  averted ;  and  its 
costs  diminished.  The  courts  of  common  law 
underwent  a  like  revision.  The  effete  Welsh  ju- 
dicature was  abolished :  the  bench  of  English  judges 
enlarged  from  twelve  to  fifteen  :  the  equitable  juris- 
diction of  the  court  of  Exchequer  superseded :  the 
procedure  of  the  courts  freed  from  fiction  and  arti- 
fice :  the  false  system  of  pleading  swept  away :  the 
law  of  evidence  amended  ;  and  justice  restored  to 
its  natural  simplicity.  The  law  of  bankruptcy  and 
insolvency  was  reviewed ;  and  a  court  established 
for  its  administration,  with  wide  general  and  local 
jurisdiction.  Justice  was  brought  home  to  every 
man's  door,  by  the  constitution  of  county  courts. 
Divorce,  which  the  law  had  reserved  as  the  peculiar 
privilege  of  the  rich,  was  made  the  equal  right  of 
all.  The  ecclesiastical  courts  were  reconstituted ; 
and  their  procedure  and  jurisdiction  reviewed.  A 
new  court  of  appeal, — of  eminent  learning  and  au- 
thority,— was  found  in  a  judicial  committee  of  the 
Privy  Council, — which,  as  the  court  of  last  resort 
from  India  and  the  colonies,  from  the  ecclesiastical 
courts  and  the  court  of  Admiralty,  is  second  only  to 
the  House  of  Lords  in  the  amplitude  of  its  jurisdic- 
tion. The  antiquated  law  of  real  property  was  re- 
cast ;  and  provision  made  for  simplifying  titles,  and 
facilitating  the  transfer  of  land.  Much  was  done, 
and  more  attempted,  for  the  consolidation  of  the 
statutes.  Nor  have  these  remarkable  amendments 
of  the  law  been  confined  to  England.     Scotland  and 


Administration  of  Jtcstice.  391 

Ireland,  and  especially  the  latter,  have  shared 
largely  in  the  work  of  reformation.  Of  all  the 
law  reforms  of  this  period,  indeed,  none  was  so 
signal  as  the  constitution  of  the  Irish  encumbered 
estates  court. 

Such  were  the  more  conspicuous  improvements  of 
the  law,  during  the  thirty  years  preceding  1860. 
Before  they  had  yet  been  commenced,  Lord  Broug- 
ham eloquently  foreshadowed  the  boast  of  that 
sovereign  who  should  have  it  to  say  '  that  he  found 
law  dear,  and  left  it  cheap  :  found  it  a  sealed  book, 
— left  it  a  living  letter :  found  it  the  patrimony  of 
the  rich, — left  it  the  inheritance  of  the  poor :  found 
it  the  two-edged  sword  of  craft  and  oppression, — 
left  it  the  staff  of  honesty,  and  the  shield  of  inno- 
cence.' The  whole  scheme  of  renovation  is  not  yet 
complete  :  but  already  may  this  proud  boast  be 
justly  uttered  by  Queen  Victoria. 

In  reviewing  the  administration  of  justice,  the 
spirit  and  temper  of  the  judges  themselves,  spirit  and 
at  different  periods,  must  not  be  over-  the  judges. 
looked.  One  of  the  first  acts  of  Greorge  III.  was  to 
complete  the  independence  of  the  judges  by  pro- 
viding that  their  commissions  should  not  expire 
with  the  demise  of  the  crown.  It  was  a  necessary 
measure,  in  consummation  of  the  policy  of  the 
Eevolution;  and, — if  unworthy  of  the  courtly 
adulations  with  which  it  was  then  received, — it 
was,   at   least,  entitled   to    approval   and   respect.* 

»  King's  Message,  March  3rd,  1761  ;  1  G-eo.  III.  c.  23;  Walpole 
Mem.,  i.  41 ;  Cooke's  Hist,  of  Party,  ii.  400.  In  1707  the  same  la^ 
was  extended  to  Ireland,  on  the  recommendation  of  Lord  Townshend, 
the  lord-lieutenant. — Walpole  Mem.,  iii.  109. 


392  Progress  of  Legislation. 

The  tenure  of  the  judges  was  now  assured;  and 
their  salaries  were  charged  permanently  on  the  civil 
list. 

The  law  had  secured  their  independence  of  the 
crown :  but  the  spirit  of  the  times  leagued  them 
closely  with  its  authority.  No  reign  was  more 
graced  by  the  learning  and  accomplishments  of  its 
judges.  They  were  superior  to  every  corrupt  influ- 
ence :  but  all  their  sympathies  and  predilections 
were  with  power.  The  enemies  of  Lord  Mansfield 
asserted  '  that  he  was  better  calculated  to  fill  the 
office  of  praetor  under  Justinian,  than  to  preside  as 
chief  criminal  judge  of  this  kingdom,  in  the  reig-n 
of  Greorge  III.'  *  Neither  Lord  Mansfield  himself, 
nor  any  other  judge,  deserved  so  grave  a  censure : 
but,  with  the  illustrious  exception  of  Lord  Camden, 
the  most  eminent  magistrates  of  that  reign  were 
unfriendly  to  liberty.  Who  so  allied  to  the  court, — 
so  stanch  to  arbitrary  principles  of  government, — so 
hostile  to  popular  rights  and  remedial  laws,  as  Lord 
Mansfield,  Lord  Thurlow,  Lord  Loughborough,  Lord 
Eldon,  and  Lord  EUenborough  ?  The  first  and  last 
of  these  so  little  regarded  their  independence,  in 
the  exercise  of  the  chief  criminal  judicature  of  the 
realm,  that  they  entered  the  cabinet,  as  ministers  of 
the  crown  ;  and  identified  themselves  with  the  exe- 
cutive government  of  the  day.  What  further 
illustration  is  needed  of  the  close  relations  of  the 
judgment-seat  with  power  ?  But  no  sooner  had 
principles  of  freedom  and  responsible  government 
gained  ascendency,  than  judges  were  animated  by  in- 

»  Wraxall  Mem.,  ii.  307. 


The  Criminal  Code.  393 

dependence  and  liberality.  Henceforward  they  ad- 
ministered justice  in  the  spirit  of  Lord  Camden; 
and  promoted  the  amendment  of  the  laws,  with  the 
enlightenment  of  statesmen. 

The  deepest  stain  upon  the  policy  of  irresponsible 
government,  is  to  be  found  in  the  history  Thecri- 
of  the  criminal  law.  The  lives  of  men  "^^^^-icode. 
were  sacrificed  with  a  reckless  barbarity,  worthier  of 
an  Eastern  despot,  or  African  chief,  than  capital 
of  a  Christian  state.  The  common  law  was  meuts." 
guiltless  of  this  severity :  but  as  the  country  ad- 
vanced in  wealth,  lawgivers  grew  merciless  to 
criminals.  Life  was  held  cheap,  compared  with 
property.^  To  hang  men  was  the  ready  expedient 
of  thoughtless  power.  From  the  Restoration  to  the 
death  of  George  III., — a  period  of  160  years, — ^no 
less  than  187  capital  offences  were  added  to  the 
criminal  code.  The  legislature  was  able,  every 
year,  to  discover  more  than  one  heinous  crime  de- 
serving of  death.  In  the  reign  of  Greorge  II.,  thirty- 
three  Acts  were  passed  creating  capital  offences :  * 
in  the  first  fifty  years  of  George  III.,  no  less  than 
sixty-three.^  In  such  a  multiplication  of  offences 
all  principle  was  ignored  :  offences  wholly  different 
in  character  and  degree,  were  confounded  in  the 
indiscriminating  penalty  of  death.     Whenever   an 


'  *  Penal  laws,  which  are  in  the  hands  of  the  rich,  are  laid  upon 
the  poor ;  and  all  our  paltriest  possessions  are  hung  round  with  gib- 
bets.'—  Goldsmiths  Vicar  of  Wakefield. 

2  Speech  of  Sir  W.  Meredith,  1777  ;  Pari.  Hist.,  xix.  237. 

'  Lord  Grenville's  Speech,  April  2ud,  1813,  on  Sir  S.  Komilly's 
Shoplifting  Bill;  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxv.  535.  This  excellent 
speech,  however,  is  scarcely  reported  in  Hansard,  but  was  printed 
separately  by  the  Capital  Punishments  Society. 


394  Progress  of  Legislation, 

offence  was  found  to  be  increasing,  some  busy  sena- 
tor called  for  new  rigoui',^  until  murder  became,  in 
the  eye  of  the  law,  no  g^reater  crime  than  picking  a 
pocket,  purloining  a  ribbon  from  a  shop,  or  pilfering 
a  pewter-pot.  Such  law-makers  were  as  ignorant 
as  they  were  cruel.  Obstinately  blind  to  the  failure 
of  their  blood-stained  laws,  they  persisted  in  main- 
taining them  long  after  they  had  been  condemned 
by  philosophers,  by  jurists,  and  by  the  common 
sense  and  humanity  of  the  people.  Dr.  Johnson, — 
no  squeamish  moralist, — exposed  them  :  ^  Sir  W. 
Blackstone,  in  whom  admiration  of  our  jurisprudence 
was  almost  a  foible,  denounced  them.^  Beccaria, 
Montesquieu,  and  Bentham'*  demonstrated  that 
certainty  of  punishment  was  more  ejffectual  in  the 
repression  of  crime,  than  severity :  but  lawgivers 
were  still  inexorable.  Nor  within  the  walls  of  Par- 
liament itself,  were  there  wanting  humane  and 
enlightened  men  to  protest  against  the  barbarity  of 
our  laws.     In  1752,  the  Commons  passed  a  bill  to 

*  Mr.  Burke  sarcastically  observed,  that  if  a  country  gentleman 
could  obtain  no  other  favour  from  the  government,  he  was  sure  to  be 
accommodated  with  a  new  felony,  without  benefit  of  clergy.  Paley 
justified  the  same  severity  to  unequal  degrees  of  guilt,  on  the  ground 
of  '  the  necessity  of  preventing  the  repetition  of  the  offence.' — • 
Moral  and  Political  PhUosophy,  Book  vi.  ch.  ix. 

2  '  Whatever  may  be  urged  by  casuists  or  politicians,  the  greater 
part  of  mankind,  as  they  can  never  think  that  to  pick  a  pocket  and 
to  pierce  the  heart  are  equally  criminal,  will  scarcely  believe  that 
two  malefactors,  so  different  in  guilt,  can  be  justly  doomed  to  the 
same  punishment.' — Bambler,  i.  114;  "Works,  iii.  275.  In  this  ad- 
mirable essay,  published  in  1751,  the  restriction  of  death  to  cases  of 
murder  was  advocated. 

^  '  It  is  a  kind  of  quackery  in  government;  and  argues  a  want  of 
solid  skill,  to  apply  the  same  universal  remedy,  the  ultiraum  sup2^li- 
cium,  to  every  case  of  difficulty.' — Comm.,  iv.  15. 

*  Bentham's  work,  '  Th^orie  des  Peines  at  des  E^compenses,'  ap- 
peared in  1811. 


The  Criminal  Code. 


195 


commute  the  punishment  of  felony,  in  certain  cases, 
to  hard  labour  in  the  dockyards:  but  it  was  not 
agreed  to  by  the  Lords. ^  In  1772,  Sir  Charles 
Bunbury  passed  a  bill  through  the  Commons,  to 
repeal  some  of  the  least  defensible  of  the  criminal 
statutes :  but  the  Lords  refused  to  entertain  it,  as 
an  innovation.2  In  1777,  Sir  W.  Meredith,  in  re- 
sisting one  of  the  numerous  bills  of  extermination, 
made  a  memorable  speech  which  still  stands  out 
in  judgment  against  his  contemporaries.  Having 
touchingly  described  the  execution  of  a  young 
woman  for  shop-lifting,  who  had  been  reduced  to 
want  by  her  husband's  impressment,  he  proceeded : 
'  I  do  not  believe  that  a  fouler  murder  was  ever 
committed  against  law,  than  the  murder  of  this 
woman,  by  law ; '  and  again :  '  the  true  hangman  is 
the  member  of  Parliament :  he  who  frames  the 
bloody  law,  is  answerable  for  the  blood  that  is  shed 
under  it.'^  But  such  words  fell  unheeded  on  the 
callous  ears  of  men  intent  on  offering  new  victims 
to  the  hangman.'* 

Warnings  more  significant  than  these  were  equally 
neglected.    The  terrors  of  the  law,  far  from  j^^^^^, 
preventing  crime,  interfered  with  its  just  pSi°^ 
punishment.     Society  revolted  against  bar-  ™^^*" 
barities  which  the  law  prescribed.     Men  wronged 

»  Comm.  Journ.,  xxri.  345;  Lords'  Journ.,  xxvii.  661. 

2  Pari.  Hist.,  xvii.  448  ;  Comm.  Journ.,  xxxiii.  ^"ib^  &c. ;  Speech 
of  Sir  W.  Meredith,  1777. 

3  Pari.  Hist,  xix.  237. 

*  Sir  William  Meredith  said :  '  When  a  member  of  Parliarnent 
brings  in  a  new  hanging  Bill,  he  begins  with  mentioning  some  injury 
that  may  be  done  to  private  property,  for  which  a  man  is  not  yet 
liable  to  be  hanged ;  and  then  proposes  the  gallows  as  the  specific 
and  infallible  means  of  eure  and  prevention.' 


39  6  Progress  of  Legislation, 

by  crimes,  shrank  from  the  shedding  of  blood,  and 
forbore  to  prosecute:  juries  forgot  their  oaths  and 
acquitted  prisoners,  against  evidence :  judges  re- 
commended the  guilty  to  mercy.^  Not  one  in  twenty 
of  the  sentences  was  carried  into  execution.  Hence 
arose  uncertainty, — one  of  the  worst  defects  in  cri- 
minal jurisprudence.  Punishment  lost  at  once  its 
terrors,  and  its  example.  Criminals  were  not  de- 
terred from  crime,  when  its  consequences  were  a 
lottery :  society  could  not  profit  by  the  sufferings  of 
guilt,  when  none  could  comprehend  why  one  man 
was  hung,  and  another  saved  from  the  gallows. 
The  law  was  in  the  breast  of  the  judge ;  the  lives 
of  men  were  at  the  mercy  of  his  temper  or  caprice.^ 
At  one  assize  town,  a  '  hanging  judge '  left  a  score 
of  victims  for  execution :  at  another,  a  milder 
magistrate  reprieved  the  wretches  whom  the  law 
condemned.  Crime  was  not  checked :  but,  in  the 
words  of  Horace  "Walpole,  the  country  became  '  one 
great  shambles ;'  and  the  people  were  brutalised  by 
the  hideous  spectacle  of  public  executions. 

Such  was  the  state  of  the  criminal  law,  when  Sir 
Sir  samnei  Samucl  Eomilly  commenced  his  generous 
bm^^sos-  labours.  He  entered  upon  them  cautiously. 
1818.  j^  1808,  he  obtained  the  remission  of  capi- 

tal punishment  for  picking  pockets.  In  1810,  he 
vainly  sought  to  extend  the  same  clemency  to  other 

*  Blackstone  Comm,,  iv.  15. 

2  Lord  Camden  said  :  '  The  discretion  of  the  judge  is  the  law  of 
t}Tants.  It  is  always  unknown  :  it  is  different  in  different  men :  it 
is  casual,  and  depends  upon  constitution,  temper,  and  passion.  In 
the  best,  it  ie  oftentimes  caprice ;  in  the  worst,  it  is  every  ^'ice, 
folly,  and  passion  to  which  human  nature  is  liable.' — St.  Tr.^ 
viii.  68. 


r 

I  triflii 


The  Criminal  Code.-  397 


trifling  thefts.  In  the  following  year,  he  succeeded 
in  passing  four  bills  through  the  Commons.  One 
only, — concerning  thefts  in  bleaching  grounds, — 
obtained  the  concurrence  of  the  Lords.  He  ven- 
tured to  deal  with  no  crimes  but  those  in  which  the 
sentence  was  rarely  carried  into  execution :  but  his 
innovations  on  the  sacred  code  were  sternly  resisted 
by  Lord  Eldon,  Lord  EUenborough,  and  the  first 
lawyers  of  his  time.  Year  after  year,  until  his  un- 
timely death,  he  struggled  to  overcome  the  obdu- 
racy of  men  in  power.  The  Commons  were  on  his 
side :  Lord  Grenville,  Lord  Lansdowne,  Lord  Grrey, 
Lord  Holland,  and  other  enlightened  peers  sup- 
ported him :  but  the  Lords,  under  the  guidance  of 
their  judicial  leaders,  were  not  to  be  convinced. 
He  did  much  to  stir  the  public  sentiment  in  his 
cause  :  but  little,  indeed,  for  the  amendment  of  the 
law.^ 

His  labours  were  continued,  under  equal  discour- 
agement, by  Sir  James  Mackintosh.^     In  g^^.  ^^^^ 
1819,  he  obtained  a  Committee,  in  opposi-  JJ^^'i9» 
tion  to  the  government ;  and  in  the  follow-  ^^^^' 
ing  year,  succeeded  in  passing  three  out  of  the  six 
measures  which  they  recommended.     This  was  all 
that  his  continued  efforts  could   accomplish.     But 
his  philosophy  and  earnest  reasoning  were  not  lost 
upon  the  more  enlightened  of  contemporary  states- 
men.    He  lived  to  see  many  of  his  own  measures 
carried   out;    and   to   mark  so  great  a  change  of 


»  Eomilly's  Life,  ii.  303,  315,  325,  333,  383  ;  iii.  95,  233,  331, 
337  ;  Twiss"s  Life  of  Lord  Eldon,  ii.  1 19. 
«  Hans.  Deb.,  1st  Ser.,  xxxix.  784,  &c. 


39^  Progress  of  Legislation, 

opinion  '  thai  lie  should  almost  think  that  he  had 
lived  in  two  different  countries,  and  conversed  with 
people  who  spoke  two  different  languages.'  ^ 

Sir  Eobert  Peel  was  the  first  minister  of  the 
Sir  Robert     crowii  who  veuturcd  upon   a  revision  of 

!PeGl*s  cri- 

minai  law     the  Criminal  code.     He  brouq-ht  together, 

bills,  1824-  .    T   .  ,  ^  n 

1830.  withm  the  narrow  compass  of  a  few  sta- 

tutes, the  accumulated  penalties  of  centuries.  He 
swept  away  several  capital  punishments  that  were 
practically  obsolete  :  but  left  the  effective  severity 
of  the  law  with  little  mitigation.  Under  his  re- 
vised code  upwards  of  forty  kinds  of  forgery  alone, 
were  punishable  with  death.^  But  public  senti- 
ment was  beginning  to  prevail  over  the  tardy  de- 
liberations of  lawyers  and  statesmen.  A  thousand 
bankers,  in  all  parts  of  the  country,  petitioned 
against  the  extreme  penalty  of  death,  in  cases  of 
forgery  :  *  the  Commons  struck  it  out  of  the  govern- 
ment bill ;  but  the  Lords  restored  it."* 

With  the  reform  period,  commenced  a  new  era 
Bevision  ^^  Criminal  legislation.  Ministers  and  law 
cSisSf-  officers  now  vied  with  philanthropists  in 
I860.  undoing   the  unhallowed   work    of   many 

generations.  In  1832,  Lord  Auckland,  Master  of 
the  3.1int,  secured  the  abolition  of  capital  punish- 
ment for  offences  connected  with  coinage :  Mr. 
attorney-general  Denman  exempted  forgery  from 
the  same  penalty, — in  all  but  two  cases,  to  whicli 
the  Lords  would  not  assent ;   and  Mr.  Ewart  ob- 

1  Mackintosh's  Life,  ii.  387-396. 

2  11  Geo.  IV.  and  1  Will.  IV.  c.  66. 

3  Presented  by  3VIr.  Brougham,  May  24th,  1830  ;  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd 
Ser.,  xxiT.  lOU.  '*  Ihid.,  xxv.  838. 


The  Criminal  Code.  399 

tained  the  like  remission  for  sheep-stealing,  and 
other  similar  offences.  In  1833,  the  Criminal  Law 
Commission  was  appointed,  to  revise  the  entire 
code.  While  its  labours  were  yet  in  progress,  Mr. 
Ewart,  ever  foremost  in  this  work  of  mercy, — and 
Mr.  Lennard  carried  several  important  amendments 
of  the  law.^  The  commissioners  recommended  nu- 
merous other  remissions,'^  which  were  promptly 
carried  into  effect  by  Lord  John  Eussell,  in  1837. 
Even  these  remissions,  however,  fell  short  of  public 
opinion,  which  found  expression  in  an  amendment 
of  Mr.  Ewart,  for  limiting  the  punishment  of  death 
to  the  single  crime  of  murder.  This  proposal  was 
then  lost  by  a  majority  of  one  :^  but  has  since,  by 
successive  measures,  been  accepted  by  the  legisla- 
ture,— murder  alone,  and  the  exceptional  crime  of 
treason,  having  been  reserved  for  the  last  penalty  of 
the  law.*  Grreat  indeed,  and  rapid,  was  this  re- 
formation of  the  criminal  code.  It  was  computed 
that  from  1810  to  1845,  upwards  of  1,400  persons 
had  suffered  death  for  crimes  which  had  since  ceased 
to  be  capital.^ 

While  these  amendments  were  proceeding,  other 
wise  provisions  were  introduced  into  the  criminal 
law.  In  1834,  the  barbarous  custom  of  hanging  in 
chains  was  abolished.  In  1836,  Mr.  Ewart,  after  a 
contention  of  many  years,  secured  to  prisoners,  on 
trial  for  felony,  the  just  privilege  of  being  heard  by 
counsel,   which   the   cold  cruelty  of  our   criminal 

»  In  1833,  1834,  and  1835.  ^  Second  Report,  p.  33. 

3  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xxxviii.  908-922. 

*  24  &  25  Vict.  c.  100. 

'  Eeport  of  Capital  Punishments  Society,  1845. 


400  Progress  of  Legislation, 

jurisprudence  had  hitherto  denied  them.^  In  the 
same  year,  Mr.  Aglionby  broke  down  the  rigorous 
usage  which  had  allowed  but  forty-eight  hours  to 
criminals  under  sentence  of  death,  for  repentance  or 
proof  of  innocence.  Nor  did  the  efforts  of  philan- 
thropists rest  here.  From  1840,  Mr.  Ewart,  sup- 
ported by  many  followers,  pressed  upon  the  Com- 
mons, again  and  again,  the  total  abolition  of  capital 
punishment.  This  last  movement  failed,  indeed ; 
and  the  law  still  demands  life  for  life.  But  such 
has  been  the  sensitive, — not  to  say  morbid, — tender- 
ness of  society,  that  many  heinous  crimes  have 
since  escaped  this  extrenie  penalty:  while  uncer- 
tainty has  been  suffered  to  impair  the  moral  influ- 
ence of  justice. 

While  lives  were  spared,  secondary  punishments 
Secondary     Were  uo  less  tempered  by  humanity  and 

punish-  X.  %i  »i 

ments.  Christian  feeling.     In  1816,  the  degrading 

and  unequal  punishment  of  the  pillory  was  confined 
to  perjury ;  and  was,  at  length,  wholly  condemned 
in  1837.2 

In  1838,  serious  evils  were  disclosed  in  the  system 
Transpor-  ^^  transportation  :  the  penal  colonies  pro- 
tation.  tested  against  its  continuance ;  and  it  was 
afterwards,  in  great  measure,  abandoned.  "What- 
ever the  objections  to  its  principle :  however  grave 
the  faults  of  its  administration, — it  was,  at  least  in 
two  particulars,  the  most  effective  secondary  punish- 

^  This  measure  had  first  been  proposed  in  1824  by  Mr.  George 
Lamb.  See  Sydney  Smith's  admirable  articles  upon  this  subject. — 
Works,  ii.  259,  iii.  1. 

-  56  Geo.  III.  c.  138  ;  1  Vict.  c.  23.  In  1815  the  Lords  rejected 
a  Bill  for  its  total  abolition.— Eomillys  Life,  iii.  144,  166,  189. 


Prisons,  401 

ment  hitherto  discovered.  It  cleansed  our  society 
of  criminals ;  and  afforded  them  the  best  oppor- 
tunity of  future  employment  and  reformation.  For 
such  a  punishment  no  equivalent  could  readily 
be  found.*  Imprisonmei^it  became  nearly  the  sole 
resource  of  the  state ;  and  how  to  punish  and  re- 
form criminals,  by  prison  discipline,  was  one  of  the 
most  critical  problems  of  the  time. 

The  condition  of  the  prisons,  in  the  last  century, 
was  a  reproacli  to  the  state,  and  to  society.  Prisons. 
They  were  damp,  dark,  and  noisome :  prisoners  were 
half-starved  on  bread  and  water, — clad  in  foul  rags, 
— and  suffered  to  perish  of  want,  wretchedness,  and 
gaol  fever.  Their  sufferings  were  aggravated  by  the 
brutality  of  tyrannous  gaolers  and  turnkeys, — abso- 
lute masters  of  their  fate.  Such  punishment  was 
scarcely  less  awful  than  the  gallows,  and  was  in- 
flicted in  the  same  merciless  spirit.  Vengeance 
and  cruelty  were  its  only  principles:  charity  and 
reformation  formed  no  part  of  its  scheme.  Prisons 
without  separation  of  sexes, — ^without  classification 
of  age  or  character, — were  schools  of  crime  and 
iniquity.  The  convicted  felon  corrupted  the  untried, 
and  perhaps  innocent  prisoner ;  and  confirmed  the 
penitent  novice  in  crime.  The  unfortunate  who 
entered  prison  capable  of  moral  improvement,  went 
forth  impure,  hardened,  and  irreclaimable. 

Such  were  the  prisons  which  Howard  visited  ;  and 
such  the  evils  he  exposed.     However  inert  the  legis- 

>  Keports  of  Sir  W.  Moleswortli's  Committee,  1837,  No.  518 ; 
1 838,  No.  669.    Bentham's  *  Th^orie  des  Peines/  «&c. ;  Dr.  Whately*s 
Letters  to  Earl  Grey  ;  Keply  of  Colonel  Arthiir ;  Innes  on  Home  and 
Colonial  Convict  Management,  1842. 
VOL.  III.  D  D 


402  Progress  of  Legislation, 

lature,  it  was  not  indifFerent  to  these  disclosures , 
and  attempts  were  immediately  made  to  improve  the 
regulation  and  discipline  of  prisons.^  The  cruelty 
and  worst  evils  of  prison  life  were  gradually  abated. 
Philanthropists  penetrated  the  abodes  of  guilt ;  and 
prisons  came  to  be  governed  in  the  spirit  of  Howard 
and  Mrs.  Fry.  But,  after  the  lapse  of  half  a  century, 
it  was  shown  that  no  enlarged  system  had  yet  been 
devised  to  unite  condign  punishment  with  reforma- 
tion ;  adequate  classification,  judicious  employment, 
and  instruction  were  still  wanting.^  The  legislature, 
at  length,  applied  itself  to  the  systematic  improve- 
ment of  prisons.  In  1835,  inspectors  were  ap- 
pointed to  correct  abuses,  and  insure  uniformity  of 
management.^  Science  and  humanity  laboured  to- 
gether to  devise  a  punishment,  calculated  at  once  to 
deter  from  crime,  and  to  reform  criminals.  The 
magistracy,  throughout  the  country,  devoted  them- 
selves to  this  great  social  experiment.  Vast  model 
prisons  were  erected  by  the  state  :  costly  gaols  by 
counties, — light,  airy,  spacious  and  healthful. 
Physical  sufifering  formed  no  part  of  the  scheme. 
Prisoners  were  comfortably  lodged,  well  fed  and 
clothed,  and  carefully  tended.  But  a  strict  classifi- 
cation was  enforced :  every  system  of  confinement, 
— solitary,  separate,  and  silent, — was  tried :  every 
variety  of  employment  devised.  While  reformation 
was  sought  in  restraints  and  discipline, — in  industrial 

^  Two  bills  were  passed  in  1774,  and  others  at  later  periods  ;  and 
see  Eeports  of  Commons'  Committees  on  gaols,  1819,  1822 ;  Sydney 
Smith's  Works,  ii.  196,  244. 

'  Five  Eeports  of  Lords'  Committee,  1835  (Duke  of  Kichmond), 
on  Gaols  and  Houses  of  Correction.  ^  b^^  Will.  IV.  c.  38. 


Reformatories.  403 

training, — in  education  and  spiritual  instruction, — 
good  conduct  was  encouraged  by  hopes  of  release 
from  confinement,  under  tickets-of-leave,  before  the 
expiration  of  the  sentence.  In  some  cases  penal 
servitude  was  followed  by  transportation, — in  others 
it  formed  the  only  punishment.  Meanwhile,  punish- 
ment was  passing  from  one  extreme  to  another.  It 
was  becoming  too  mild  and  gentle  to  deter  from 
crime  :  while  hopes  of  reformation  were  too  generally 
disappointed.  Further  experiments  may  be  more 
complete  :  but  crime  is  an  intractable  ill,  which  has 
baffled  the  wisdom  of  all  ages.  Men  born  of  the 
felon  type,  and  bred  to  crime,  will  ever  defy  rigour 
and  frustrate  mercy.  If  the  present  generation 
have  erred,  its  errors  have  been  due  to  humanity, 
and  Christian  hopefulness  of  good.  May  we  not 
contrast  them  proudly  with  the  wilful  errors  of  past 
times, — neglect,  moral  indifference,  and  cruelty  ? 

Xor  did  the  state  rest  satisfied  with  the  improve- 
ment of  prisons :  but  alive  to  the  peculiar  Rgfonna- 
needs  and  dangers  of  juvenile  delinquents,  *°"^- 
and  the  classes  whence  they  sprang,  it  provided  for 
the  establishment  of  reformatory  and  industrial 
schools,  in  which  the  young  might  be  spared  the 
contamination  and  infamy  of  a  gaol,  and  trained,  if 
possible,  to  virtue.^ 

Our  ancestors,  trusting  to  the  severity  of  their 
punishments,  for  the  protection  of  life  and  PoUce. 
property,  took  little  pains  in  the  prevention  of  crime. 
The  metropolis  was  left  to  the  care  of  drunken  and 
decrepid  watchmen,  and  scoundrel  thief-takers, — 

»  17  &  18  Vict.  c.  86,  &c. 

D  D  2 


404  Progress  of  Legislation, 

companions  and  confederates  of  thieves.^  The 
abuses  of  &uch  a  police  had  long  been  notorious,  and 
a  constant  theme  of  obloquy  and  ridicule.  They 
had  frequently  been  exposed  by  parliamentary  com- 
mittees ;  but  it  was  not  until  1829,  that  Mr.  Peel 
had  the  courage  to  propose  his  new  metropolitan 
police.  This  effective  and  admirable  force  has  since 
done  more  for  the  order  and  safety  of  the  metro- 
polis, than  a  hundred  executions,  every  year,  at  the 
Old  Bailey.  A  similar  force  was  afterwards  organ- 
ised in  the  city  of  London  ;  and  every  considerable 
town  throughout  the  realm,  was  prompt  to  follow  a 
successful  example.  The  rural  districts,  however, 
and  smaller  boroughs,  were  still  without  protection. 
Already,  in  1836,  a  constabulary  of  rare  efficiency 
had  been  organised  in  Ireland :  but  it  was  not  until 
1839  that  provision  was  made  for  the  voluntary 
establishment  of  a  police  in  English  counties  and 
boroughs.  A  rural  police  was  rendered  the  more 
necessary  by  the  efficient  watching  of  large  towns  ; 
and  at  length,  in  1856,  the  support  of  an  adequate 
constabulary  force  was  required  of  every  county  and 
borough. 

And  further,  criminals  have  been  brought  more 
Summary  readily  to  justice,  by  enlargements  of  the 
tion.  summary  jurisdiction   of  magistrates.     A 

principle  of  criminal  jurisprudence  which  excludes 
trial  by  jury,  is  to  be  accepted  with  caution :  but  its 
practical  administration  has  been  unquestionably 
beneficial.     Justice  has  been  administered  well  and 


*  Wraxall's  Mem.,  i.  329 ;  Eeports  of  Commons'  Comm.,  1812, 
1816,  1817,  1.822,  and  1828. 


The  Poor  Laws,  405 

speedily;  while  oflfenders  have  been  spared  a  long 
confinement  prior  to  trial ;  and  the  innocent  have 
had  a  prompt  acquittal.  The  like  results  have  also 
been  attained  by  an  increase  of  stipendiary  magis- 
trates, in  the  metropolis  and  elsewhere, — by  the 
institution  of  the  Central  Criminal  Court, — and  by 
more  frequent  assizes. 

The  stem  and  unfeeling  temper  which  had  dictated 
the  penal  code,  directed  the  discipline  of  nogging 
fleets  and  armies.     Life  was  sacrificed  with  ^^^^^^ 
the  same  cruel  levity;  and  the  lash  was  ^™^* 
made   an   instrument   of  torture.     This   barbarous 
rigour  was  also  gradually  relaxed,  under  the  com- 
bined influence  otl  humanity  and  freedom. 

Equally  wise  and  humane  were  numerous  measures 
for  raising  the  moral  and  social  condition  ^^ 
of  the  people.  And  first  in  importance  ^^* 
was  an  improved  administration  of  relief  to  the 
poor.  Since  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  the  law  had 
provided  for  the  relief  of  the  destitute  poor  of 
England.  This  wise  and  simple  provision,  however, 
had  been  so  perverted  by  ignorant  administration 
that,  in  relieving  the  poor,  the  industrial  population 
of  the  whole  country  was  being  rapidly  reduced  to 
pauperism,  while  property  was  threatened  with  no 
distant  ruin.  The  system  which  was  working  this 
mischief  assumed  to  be  founded  upon  benevolence : 
but  no  evil  genius  could  have  designed  a  scheme  of 
greater  malignity  for  the  corruption  of  the  human 
race.  The  fund  intended  for  the  relief  of  want  and 
sickness, — of  age  and  impotence, — was  recklessly 
distributed  to  all  who  begged  a  share.     Everyone 


4o6  Progress  of  Legislation, 

was  taught  to  look  to  the  parish,  and  not  to  his  own 
honest  industiy,  for  support.  The  idle  clown,  with- 
out work,  fared  as  well  as  the  industrious  labourer 
who  toiled  from  morn  till  night.  The  shameless 
slut,  with  half  a  dozen  children, — the  progeny  of 
many  fathers, — was  provided  for  as  liberally  as  the 
destitute  widow  and  lier  orphans.  But  worse  than 
this, — independent  labourers  were  tempted  and 
seduced  into  the  degraded  ranks  of  pauperism,  by 
payments  freely  made  in  aid  of  wages.  Cottage 
rents  were  paid,  and  allowances  given  according  to 
the  number  of  a  family.  Hence  thrift,  self-denial, 
and  honest  independence  were  discouraged.  The 
manly  farm  labourer,  who  scorned  to  ask  for  alms, 
found  his  own  wages  artificially  lowered,  while  im- 
providence was  cherished  and  rewarded  by  the  parish. 
He  could  barely  live,  without  incumbrance :  but 
boys  and  girls  were  hastening  to  church, — without 
a  thought  of  the  morrow, — and  rearing  new  broods 
of  paupers,  to  be  maintained  by  the  overseer.  Who 
can  wonder  that  labourers  were  rapidly  sinking  into 
pauperism,  without  pride  or  self-respect  ?  But  the 
evil  did  not  even  rest  here.  Paupers  were  actually 
driving  other  labourers  out  of  employment, — ^that 
labour  being  preferred  which  was  partly  paid  out  of 
rates,  to  which  employers  were  forced  to  contribute. 
As  the  cost  of  pauperism,  thus  encouraged,  was 
increasing,  the  poorer  ratepayers  were  themselves 
reduced  to  poverty.  The  soil  was  ill-cultivated  by 
pauper  labour,  and  its  rental  consumed  by  parish 
rates.  In  a  period  of  fifty  years,  the  poor-rates 
were  quadrupled ;  and  had  reached, in  18 33,  the  enor- 


The  Poor  Laws.  407 

mous  amount  of  8,600,000Z.  In  many  parishes  they 
were  approaching  the  annual  value  of  the  land 
itself. 

Such  evils  as  these  demanded  a  bold  and  thorough 
remedy;  and  the  recommendations  of  a  The  new 
masterly  commission  ofinquiry  were  accept-  1834. 
ed  by  the  first  reformed  Parliament  in  1834,  as  the 
basis  of  a  new  poor  law.  The  principle  was  that  of 
the  Act  of  Elizabeth, — to  confine  relief  to  destitu- 
tion; and  its  object,  to  distinguish  between  want 
and  imposture.  This  test  was  to  be  found  in  the 
workhouse.  Hitherto  pauperism  had  been  generally 
relieved  at  home,  the  parish  workhouse  being  the 
refuge  for  the  aged,  for  orphans,  and  others,  whom 
it  suited  better  than  out-door  relief.  Now  out-door 
relief  was  to  be  withdrawn  altogether  from  the  able- 
bodied,  whose  wants  were  to  be  tested  by  their  willing- 
ness to  enter  the  workhouse.  This  experiment  had 
already  been  successfully  tried  in  a  few  well-ordered 
parishes,  and  was  now  generally  adopted.  But  in- 
stead of  continuing  ill-regulated  parish  workhouses, 
several  parishes  were  united,  and  union  workhouses 
established,  common  to  them  all.  The  local  ad- 
ministration of  the  poor  was  placed  under  elected 
boards  of  guardiains;  and  its  general  superintend- 
ence under  a  central  board  of  commissioners  in 
London.  A  change  so  sudden  in  all  the  habits  of 
the  labouring  classes  could  not  be  introduced  with- 
out discontents  and  misconception.  Some  of 
the  provisions  of  the  new  law  were  afterwards  par- 
tially relaxed :  but  its  main  principles  were  carried 
into  successful  operation.     Within  three  years  the 


4o8  Progress  of  Legislation, 

annual  expenditure  for  the  relief  of  the  poor  was  re- 
duced to  the  extent  of  three  millions.  The  plague 
of  pauperism  was  stayed ;  and  the  English  peasantry 
rescued  from  irretrievable  corruption.  The  full 
benefits  of  the  new  poor  law  have  not  yet  been 
realised  :  but  a  generation  of  labourers  has  already 
grown  up  in  independence  and  self-respect ;  and  the 
education  and  industrial  training  of  children,  in  the 
workhouses,  have  elevated  a  helpless  class,  formerly 
neglected  and  demoralised.^ 

While  England  had  been  threatened  with  ruin, 
Poor  laws  of  from  a  rccklcss  encouragement  of  pauper- 
scotiand.  jgj^^  ^^  jg^^  ^£  Scotland  had  made  no  ade- 
quate provision  for  the  support  of  the  destitute  poor. 
This  error,  scarcely  more  defensible,  was  corrected 
Of  Ireland,  in  1845.  But  worst  of  all  was  the  case  of 
Ireland,  where  there  was  absolutely  no  legal  pro- 
vision for  the  destitute.^  The  wants  of  the  peasantry 
were  appalling :  two  millions  and  a  half  were  sub- 
sisting, for  a  part  of  every  year,  on  charity.  The 
poor  man  shared  his  meal  with  his  poorer  neigh- 
bour ;  and  everywhere  the  vagrant  found  a  home. 
To  approach  so  vast  a  mass  of  destitution,  and  so 
peculiar  a  condition  of  society,  was  a  hazardous  ex- 
periment. Could  property  bear  the  burden  of  pro- 
viding for  such  multitudes?  could  the  ordinary 
machinery  of  poor-law  administration  safely  deal 
with  them?     The  experiment  was  tried  in  1838, — 

*  Extracts  of  information  collected,  1833 ;  Eeport  of  Commis- 
sioners of  Inquiry,  1834;  Debates  in  Lords  and  Commons,  April 
17tli  and  July  21st,  1834 ;  NichoUs'  Hist,  of  the  Poor  Law,  &c. 

2  3rd  Eeport  of  Commissioners  on  the  Poorer  Classes  in  Ireland, 
1836,  p.  25,  &c.  _ 


Lunatics.  409 

not  without  serious  misgivings, — and  it  succeeded. 
The  burden,  indeed,  was  often  ruinous  to  the  land  ; 
and  the  workhouse  was  peculiarly  repugnant  to  the 
Irish  peasantry :  but  the  operation  of  the  new  law 
was  facilitated  by  the  fearful  famine  of  1846 ;  and 
has  since  contributed,  with  other  causes,  to  the 
advancing  prosperity  of  Ireland.  The  poor-law 
legislation  of  this  period  was  conceived  in  a  spirit 
of  enlightened  charity :  it  saved  England  from 
pauperism,  and  the  poor  of  Scotland  and  Ireland 
from  destitution. 

The  same  beneficence  has  marked  recent  legisla- 
tion for  the  care  of  lunatics.  Within  the  Lunatics, 
wide  range  of  human  suffering,  no  affliction  so  much 
claims  pity  and  protection  as  insanity.  Rich  and 
poor  are  stricken  alike ;  and  both  are  equally  de- 
fenceless. Treated  with  care  and  tenderness,  it  is 
sad  enough :  aggravated  by  neglect  and  cruelty,  it 
is  unspeakably  awful.  To  watch  over  such  affliction, 
— to  guard  it  from  wrong  and  oppression, — to  miti- 
gate its  sufferings,  and,  if  possible,  to  heal  it, — ^is 
the  sacred  office  of  the  state.  But  until  a  period, 
comparatively  recent,  this  office  was  grievously  neg- 
lected. Rich  patients  were  left  in  charge  of  keepers, 
in  their  own  homes,  or  in  private  asylums,  without 
control  or  supervision :  the  poor  were  trusted  to  the 
rude  charge  of  their  own  families,  or  received  into 
the  workhouse,  with  other  paupers.  Neglect,  and 
too  often  barbarity,  were  the  natural  results.  The 
strong  may  not  be  safely  trusted  with  unrestrained 
power  over  the  weak.  The  well-paid  keeper,  the 
pauper   family,   the   workhouse   matron,   could  all 


4IO  Progress  of  Legislation, 

tyrannise  over  helpless  beings,  bereft  of  reason. 
Sad  tales  were  heard  of  cruelty  committed  within 
walls,  to  which  no  watchful  guardian  was  admitted ; 
and  idiots  were  suffered  to  roam  at  large,  the  sport 
of  idle  jests,  or  worse  brutality. 

A  few  charitable  asylums  had  been  founded,  by 
private  or  local  munificence,  for  the  treatment  of 
the  insane  ;  ^  but  it  was  not  until  the  present  cen- 
tury that  county  and  borough  lunatic  asylums  began 
to  be  established ;  nor  until  after  the  operation-  of 
the  new  poor  law,  that  their  erection  was  rendered 
compulsory.^  At  the  same  time,  provision  was  made 
for  the  inspection  of  asylums ;  and  securities  were 
taken  against  the  wrongful  detention  or  misman- 
agement of  lunatics.  Private  asylums  are  licensed : 
every  house  tenanted  by  the  insane  is  subjected  to 
visitation  ;  and  the  care  of  all  lunatics  is  intrusted 
to  commissioners.'  The  like  provision  has  also  been 
made  for  the  care  of  lunatics  in  Scotland  and  Ire- 
land.^ Two  principles  were  here  carried  out, — the 
guardianship  of  the  state,  and  the  obligation  of 
property  to  bear  the  burden  of  a  liberal  treatment 
of  the  lunatic  poor.  Both  are  no  less  generous  than 
just ;  and  the  resources  of  medical  science,  and  pri- 
vate charity,  have  more  than  kept  pace  with  the 
watchfulness  of  the  state,  in  alleviating  the  suffer- 
ings of  the  insane. 

In   other  cases,   the  state  has  also  extended  its 


*  E.g.  Bethlehem  Hospital,  in  1547  ;  St.  Peter's  Hospital,  Bristol, 
in  1697;  Bethel  Hospital,  Norwich,  in  1713;  St.  Luke's  Hospital, 
in  1751. 

2  In  1845 ;  8  &  9  Vict.  c.  126.  »  g  &  9  Vict.  c.  100,  &c. 

*  9  and  10  Vict.  c.  115,  &c.;  20  &  21  Vict.  c.  71. 


Labour  in  Factories.  411 

generous  protection  to  the  weak, — even  where  its 
duty  was  not  so  clear.  To  protect  women  Labour  in 
and  children  from  excessive,  or  unsuit-  mines,  &c. 
able  labour,  it  has  ventured  to  interfere  with  husband 
and  wife,  parent  and  child,  labourer  and  employer, 
— with  free  labour,  and  wages,  production  and 
profits.  The  first  Sir  Eobert  Peel  had  induced  the 
legislature  to  interfere  for  the  preservation  of  the 
health  and  morals  of  factory  children.^  But  to  the 
earnest  philanthropy  of  Mr.  Sadler  and  Lord  Ashley 
(now  Earl  of  Shaftesbury)  is  due  their  first  pro- 
tection from  excessive  labour.  It  was  found  that 
children  were  doomed  to  immoderate  toil  in  factories, 
by  the  cupidity  of  parents ;  and  young  persons  and 
females  accustomed  to  hours  of  labour,  injurious  to 
health  and  character.  The  state  stretched  forth  its 
arm  to  succour  them.  The  employment  of  children 
of  tender  years  in  factories  was  prohibited:  the 
labour  of  the  young,  of  both  sexes  under  eighteen, 
and  of  all  women,  was  subjected  to  regulation :  an 
inspection  of  factories  was  instituted ;  and  provision 
made  for  the  education  of  factory  children.^  The 
like  parental  care  was  extended  to  other  depart- 
ments of  labour, — to  mines,^  and  bleaching  works,'* 
and  even  to  the  sweeping  of  chimneys.^ 

The  state  has  further  endeavoured  to  improve  the 
social  condition  of  the  working  classes,  by  Measures  for 

.  the  improve- 

providing  for  the  establishment  of  savings   mentof  the 
banks,  and  provident  societies, — of  schools  classes. 

1  In  1802  and  1819;  Acts  42  Geo.  III.  c.  73;  59  Geo.  in.  c 
66,  &c.  2  3  &  4  Will.  IV.  c.  103  ;  7  Vict.  c.  15,  &c. 

'  »  5  &  6  Vict.  c.  99.  *  23  &  24  Vict.  c.  78. 

5  4  &  5  Will.  IV.  c.  35,  &c. 


4 1 2  Progress  of  Legislation, 

of  design,  of  baths  and  washliouses,  of  parks  and 
places  of  recreation ;  by  encouraging  the  construc- 
tion of  more  suitable  dwellings,  by  the  supervision 
of  common  lodging  houses, — and  by  measures  of 
sanitary  improvement ;  the  benefits  of  which,  though 
common  to  all  classes,  more  immediately  affect  the 
health  and  welfare  of  the  labouring  multitudes.  In 
this  field,  however,  the  state  can  do  comparatively 
little  :  it  is  from  society, — from  private  benevolence 
and  local  activity,  that  efifectual  aid  must  be  sought 
for  the  regeneration  of  the  poorer  classes.  And  this 
great  social  duty  has  fallen  upon  a  generation 
already  awakened  to  its  urgency. 

Among  the  measures  most  conducive  to  the  moral 
Popular  ^^^  social  improvement  of  the  people,  has 
education.  \yQQ^  the  promotiou  of  popular  education. 
That  our  ancestors  were  not  insensible  to  the  value 
of  extended  education,  is  attested  by  the  grammar- 
schools  and  free  or  charity-schools  in  England,  and 
by  the  parochial  schools  of  Scotland.  The  state, 
nowever, — inert  and  indifferent, — permitted  endow- 
ments for  the  good  of  society  to  be  wasted  and  mis- 
applied. From  the  latter  end  of  last  century  much 
was  done,  by  private  zeal  and  liberality,  for  the  edu- 
cation of  the  poor :  but  the  state  stirred  not.^  It 
was  reserved  for  Mr.  Brougham,  in  1816,  to  awaken 
Parliament  to  the  ignorance  of  the  poor  ;  and  to  his 
vigilance  was  it  due,  that  many  educational  endow- 
ments were  restored  to  the  uses  for  which  they  were 
designed.     Again,  in   1820,  he  proposed  a  scheme 

»  See  Porter's  Progress  of  the  Nation,  pp.  690-699. 


Popular  Edtccation.  4 1 3 

for  the  systematic  education  of  the  poor.^  To  the 
general  education  of  the  people,  however,  there  was 
not  only  indijfference,  but  repugnance.  The  eleva- 
tion of  the  lower  grades  of  society  was  dreaded,  as 
dangerous  to  the  state.  Such  instruction  as  im- 
pressed them  with  the  duty  of  contentment  and 
obedience  might  be  well :  but  education  which 
should  raise  their  intelligence  and  encourage  free- 
dom of  thought,  would  promote  democracy,  if  not 
revolution.  It  was  right  that  the  children  of  the 
poor  should  be  taught  the  church  catechism  :  it  was 
wrong  that  they  should  learn  to  read  newspapers.^ 
So  long  as  this  feeling  prevailed,  it  was  vain  to  hope 
for  any  systematic  extension  of  secular  education : 
but  the  church  and  other  religious  bodies  were 
exerting  themselves  earnestly,  in  their  proper  sphere 
of  instruction.  In  their  schools,  religious  teaching- 
was  the  primary  object :  but  great  advances  were 
also  made  in  the  general  education  of  the  poor. 
Meanwhile,  the  increasing  prosperity  of  the  country 
was  rapidly  developing  the  independent  education 
of  the  children  of  other  classes,  who  needed  no  en- 
couragement or  assistance.  As  society  advanced,  it 
became  more  aHve  to  the  evils  of  ignorance  ;  and  in 
a  reformed  Parliament,  the  political  jealousy  of 
popular  education  was  speedily  overcome. 

In  Ireland,  as  we  have  seen,  a  broad  scheme  of 
national  education  was  introduced,  in  1831,  obstacles  to 
on  the  principle  of  '  a  combined  literary,  S'nationT 
and  a  separate  religious  education.'^     In     '^'^  °^* 

»  Hans.  Deb.,  2nd  Ser.,  ii.  49  ;  Harwood's  Mem.  of  Lord  Brough- 
am,  124,  161. 

'  See  Lord  Cockbnrn's  Life  of  Jeffrey,  i.  68 ;  Porter's  Progress, 
p.  694.  »./SM2)ra,  p.  270. 


414  Progress  of  Legislatio7i. 

Great  Britain,  however,  there  were  obstacles  to  any- 
such  system  of  national  education.  In  the  schools 
of  the  church,  and  of  dissenters,  religious  teaching 
was  the  basis  of  education.  The  patrons  of  both 
were  jealous  of  one  another,  resentful  of  interference, 
and  unwilling  to  co-operate  in  any  combined  scheme 
of  national  education.  The  church  claimed  the 
exclusive  right  of  educating  the  people :  dissenters 
asserted  an  equal  title  to  direct  the  education  of  the 
children  of  their  own  sects.  Both  parties  were 
equally  opposed  to  any  scheme  of  secular  education, 
distinct  from  their  own  religious  teaching.  Hence 
the  government  was  obliged  to  proceed  with  the 
utmost  caution.  Its  connection  with  education  was 
Parliament-  commeuccd  iu  1834,  by  a  small  parliament- 
Rf  o?*^  ary  grant,  in  aid  of  the  building  of  school- 
education.  j^Q^geg^  ^he  administration  of  this  fund 
was  confided  to  the  Treasury,  by  whom  it  was  to  be 
distributed,  through  the  National  School  Society, 
representing  the  church,  and  the  British  and  Foreign 
School  Society,  to  whose  schools  children  of  all  re- 
ligious denominations  were  admitted.  This  arrange- 
ment was  continued  until  1839 ;  when  Lord  Mel- 
bourne's government  vested  the  management  of  the 
education  funds  in  a  Committee  of  Privy  Council. 
This  change  was  effected,  in  contemplation  of  a  more 
comprehensive  scheme,  by  which  aid  should  be 
given  directly  to  schools  connected  with  the  chm-ch, 
and  other  religious  bodies.  The  church  was  alarmed, 
lest  her  own  privileges  should  be  disturbed  :  many 
of  the  conservative  party  were  still  adverse,  on 
political  grounds,  to  the  extension  of  education ;  and 


Commercial  Policy,  4 1 5 

the  government  scheme  was  nearly  overthrovm. 
The  annual  grant  met  with  strenuous  resistance ; 
and  was  voted  in  the  Commons  by  a  bare  majority 
of  two.^  The  Lords,  coming  to  the  aid  of  the  church 
and  their  own  party,  hastened  to  condemn  the  new 
scheme,  in  an  address  to  the  Crown.^  Their  lord- 
ships, however,  received  a  courteous  rebuke  from 
the  throne  ;^  and  the  scheme  was  vigorously  carried 
out.  Despite  of  jealousies  and  distrust,  the  opera- 
tions of  the  Committee  of  the  Privy  Council  were 
speedily  extended.  Society  was  awakened  to  the 
duty  of  educating  the  people :  local  liberality 
abounded :  the  rivalry  of  the  church  and  dissenters 
prompted  them  to  increased  exertions;  and  every 
year,  larger  demands  were  made  upon  the  public 
fund,  until,  in  1860,  the  annual  grant  amounted  to 
nearly  700,000^. 

However  such  a  system  may  have  fallen  short  of  a 
complete  scheme  of  national  education,  embracing 
the  poorest  and  most  neglected  classes,  it  gave  an 
extraordinary  impulse  to  popular  education;  and 
bore  ample  testimony  to  the  earnestness  of  the  state, 
in  promoting  the  social  improvement  of  the  people. 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  material  interests  of  the 
country,— its  commerce,  its  industry,  its  commercial 
productive  energies.  How  were  these  ^"''^' 
treated  by  a  close  and  irresponsible  government? 
and  how  by  a  government  based  upon  public  opinion, 
and  striving  to  promote  the  general  welfare  and  hap- 
piness of  the  people  ?  Our  former  commercial  policy 

»  Hans.  Deb.,  3rd  Ser.,  xlviii.  229,  et  seq.  '  Ibid.,  1332. 

»  Ibid.,  xlix.  128  ;  Ann.  Eeg.,  1839,  171. 


41 6  Progress  of  Legislatioii, 

was  founded  on  monopolies,  and  artificial  protections 
and  encouragements, — maintained  for  the  benefit  of 
the  few,  at  the  expense  of  the  many.  The  trade  of 
the  East  was  monopolised  by  the  East  India  Com- 
pany :  the  trade  of  the  Mediterranean  by  the  Levant 
Company :  ^  the  trade  of  a  large  portion  of  North 
America  by  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company.^  The  trade 
of  Ireland  and  the  colonies  was  shackled  for  the  sake 
of  English  producers  and  manufacturers.  Every 
produce  and  manufacture  of  England  was  protected, 
by  high  duties  or  prohibitions,  against  the  competi- 
tion of  imported  commodities  of  the  like  nature. 
Many  exports  were  encouraged  by  bounties  and 
drawbacks.  Everyone  sought  protection  or  encour- 
agement for  himself, — utterly  regardless  of  the 
welfare  of  others.  The  protected  interests  were 
favoured  by  the  state,  while  the  whole  community 
suffered  from  prices  artificially  raised,  and  industry 
unnaturally  disturbed.  This  selfish  and  illiberal  po- 
licy found  support  in  erroneous  doctrines  of  political 
economy  :  but  its  foundation  was  narrow  self-interest. 
First  one  monopoly  was  established,  and  then 
another,  until  protected  interests  dominated  over  a 
Parliament  in  which  the  whole  community  were  un- 
represented. Lord  North  and  Mr.  Pitt,  generally 
commanding  obedient  majorities,  were  unable  to  do 
justice  to  the  industry  of  Ireland,  in  opposition  to 
English  traders.^  No  power  short  of  rebellion  could 
have  arrested  the  monstrous  corn  bill  of  1815,  which 


'  This  Company  -was  -wound  np  in  1826. — 6  Geo.  IV.  c- 
2  Tho  charter  of  this  Company  expired  in  1859. 
'  Bui^ra,  p.  320. 


Commercial .  Policy,  4 1 7 

landowners,  with  one  voice,  demanded.  But  politi- 
cal science  and  liberty  advanced  together :  the  one 
pointing  out  the  true  interests  of  the  people :  the 
other  ensuring  their  just  consideration. 

It  was  not  until  fifty  years  after  Adam  Smith  had 
exposed  what  he  termed  'the  mean  and  Freetrade. 
malignant  expedients  of  the  mercantile  system,'  that 
this  narrow  policy  was  disturbed.  Mr.  Huskisson 
was  the  first  minister,  after  Mr.  Pitt,  who  ventured 
to  touch  protected  interests.  A  close  representation 
still  governed :  but  public  opinion  had  already  begun 
to  exercise  a  powerful  influence  over  Parliament ; 
and  he  was  able  to  remove  some  protections  from 
the  silk  and  woollen  trades, — to  restore  the  right  of 
free  emigration  to  artisans, — and  to  break  in  upon 
the  close  monopoly  of  the  navigation  laws.  These 
were  the  beginnings  of  free  trade :  but  a  further 
development  of  political  liberty  was  essential  to  the 
triumph  of  that  generous  and  fruitful  policy.  A 
wider  representation  wi'ested  exclusive  power  from 
the  hands  of  the  favoured  classes ;  and  monopolies 
fell,  one  after  another,  in  quick  succession.  The 
trade  of  the  East  was  thrown  open  to  the  free  enter- 
prise of  our  merchants :  the  productions  of  the  world 
were  admitted,  for  the  consumption  and  comfort  of 
our  teeming  multitudes  :  exclusive  interests  in  ship- 
ping,— in  the  colonies, — in  commerce  and  manufac- 
tures,— were  made  to  yield  to  the  public  good.  But 
above  all,  the  most  baneful  of  monopolies,  and  the 
most  powerful  of  protected  interests,  were  overborne. 
The  lords  of  the  soil,  once  dominant  in  Parliament, 
had  secured  to  themselves  a  monopoly  in  the  food 

VOL.  III.  ^  E 


4 1 8  Prog7^ess  of  Legislation. 

of  the  people.  To  ensure  higli  rents,  it  had  been 
decreed  that  multitudes  should  hunger.  Such  a 
monopoly  was  not  to  be  endured ;  and  so  soon  as 
public  opinion  had  fully  accepted  the  conclusions  of 
science,  it  fell  before  enlightened  statesmen  and  a 
popular  Parliament. 

The  fruits  of  free  trade  are  to  be  seen  in  the  mar- 
vellous development  of  British  industry.  England 
will  ever  hold  in  grateful  remembrance  the  names  of 
the  foremost  promoters  of  this  new  policy,  —  of 
Huskisson,  Poulett  Thomson,  Hume,  Villiers,  and 
Labouchere, — of  Cobden  and  Bright, — of  Peel  and 
Grladstone :  but  let  her  not  forget  that  their  fruitful 
statesmanship  was  quickened  by  the  life  of  freedom. 

The  financial  policy  of  this  period  was  conceived 
Financial  ^^  ^^  Same  Spirit  of  enlightened  liberality ; 
po^'^y*  and  regarded  no  less  the  general  welfare 

and  happiness  of  the  people.  Industry,  while  groan- 
ing under  protection,  had  further  been  burdened  by 
oppressive  taxes,  imposed  simply  for  purposes  of 
revenue.  It  has  been  the  policy  of  modem  finance 
to  dispense  with  duties  on  raw  materials,  on  which 
the  skill  and  labour  of  our  industrious  artisans  is 
exercised.  Free  scope  has  been  given  to  productive 
industry.  The  employment  and  comfort  of  the 
people  have  been  fui'ther  encouraged  by  the  removal 
or  reduction  of  duties  on  manufactured  articles  of 
universal  use, — on  glass,  on  bricks  and  tiles,  on  soap 
and  paper,  and  hundreds  of  other  articles. 

The  luxuries  of  the  many,  as  well  as  their  food, 
have  also  been  relieved  from  the  pressure  of  taxation. 
Tea,  sugar,  coffee,  cocoa, — nay,  nearly  all  articles 


Financia I  Policy,  4 1 9 

wliich  contribute  to  the  comfort  and  enjoyment  of 
daily  life, — have  been  placed  within  reach  of  the 
poorest.^  And  among  financial  changes  conceived 
in  the  interest  of  the  whole  community,  the  remark- 
able penny  postage  of  Sir  Eowland  Hill  deserves  an 
honourable  place.  Notwithstanding  extraordinary 
reductions  of  taxation,  the  productive  energies  of  the 
country,  encouraged  by  so  liberal  a  policy,  have  more 
than  made  good  the  amount  of  these  remissions. 
Tax  after  tax  has  been  removed ;  yet  the  revenue, — 
ever  buoyant  and  elastic, — has  been  maintained  by 
the  increased  productiveness  of  the  remaining  duties. 
This  policy, — the  conception  of  Sir  Henry  Parnell, — 
was  commenced  by  Lord  Althorp,  boldly  extended 
by  Sir  Robert  Peel,  and  consummated  by  Mr.  Glad- 
stone. 

To  ensure  the  safe  trial  of  this  financial  experi- 
ment. Sir  Robert  Peel  proposed  a  property-tax,  in 
time  of  peace,  to  fall  exclusively  on  the  higher  and 
middle  classes.  It  was  accepted  :  and  marks,  no  less 
than  other  examples,  the  solicitude  of  Parliament 
for  the  welfare  of  the  many,  and  the  generous  spirit 
of  those  classes  who  have  most  influence  over  its 
deliberations.  The  succession  duty,  imposed  some 
years  later,  affords  another  example  of  the  self-deny- 
ing principles  of  a  popular  Parliament.  In  1796, 
the  Commons,  ever  ready  to  mulct  the  people  at  the 
bidding  of  the  minister, — yet  unwilling  to  bear  their 
own  proper  burthen,  refused  to  grant  Mr.  Pitt  such 


■*  In  1842,  the  customs'  tariff  embraced  1,163  articles;  in  1860,  it 
comprised  less  than  50,  of  which  15  contributed  nearly  the  whole 
revenue. 

E  B  2 


4  2  o  Pi' ogress  of  L  egisla  Hon. 

a  tax  upon  their  landed  property.  In  1853,  the 
reformed  Parliament,  intent  upon  sparing  industry, 
accepted  this  heavy  charge  from  Mr.  Grladstone. 

The  only  unsatisfactory  feature  of  modern  j&nance 
Vast  in-        has  been  the  formidable  and   continuous 

crease  of  .  rm  i  i 

expenditure,  lucrcase  01  expenditure.  The  demands 
upon  the  Exchequer, — apart  from  the  fixed  charge 
of  the  public  debt, — ^were  nearly  doubled  during 
the  last  ten  years  of  this  period.^  Much  of  this 
serious  increase  was  due  to  the  Eussian,  Chinese, 
and  Persian  wars, — to  the  vast  armaments  and  un- 
settled policy  of  foreign  states, — ^to  the  proved 
deficiencies  of  our  military  organisation, — ^to  the 
reconstruction  of  the  navy, — and  to  the  greater 
costliness  of  all  the  equipments  of  modern  warfare. 
Much,  however,  was  caused  by  the  liberal  and 
humane  spirit  of  modem  administration.  While 
the  utmost  efficiency  was  sought  in  fleets  and  armies, 
the  comforts  and  moral  welfare  of  our  seamen  and 
soldiers  were  promoted,  at  gTeat  cost  to  the  state. 
So,  again,  large  permanent  additions  were  made  to 
the  civil  expenditure,  by  an  improved  administra- 
tion of  justice, — a  more  effective  police, — extended 
postal  communications, — the  public  education  of 
the  people, — and  the  growing  needs  -of  civilisation, 
throughout  a  powerful  and  wide-spread  empire. 
This  augmented  expenditure,  however,  deprived  the 

'  In  1850,  the  estimated  expenditure  was  50,763,583^. ;  in  1860, 
it  amounted  to  73,634,0002.  The  latter  amount,  however,  comprised 
4,700,0002.  for  the  collection  of  the  revenue,  which  had  not  been 
brought  into  the  account  until  1856.  In  the  former  year  the  charge  of 
the  public  debt  was  28,105,0002. ;  in  the  latter,  26,200,0002.  Hence 
an  expenditure  of  22,658,5832,  at  one  period,  is  to  be  compared  with 
42,034,0002.  at  the  other. 


Increase  of  Expenditure,  4 2 1 

people  of  the  full  benefits  of  a  judicious  scheme  of 
taxation.  The  property  tax,  intended  only  as  a 
temporary  expedient,  was  continued ;  and,  however 
light  and  equal  the  general  incidence  of  other 
taxes, — enormous  contributions  to  the  state  were 
necessarily  a  heavy  burden  upon  the  industry,  the 
resources,  and  the  comforts  of  the  people. 

Such  have  been  the  legislative  fruits  of  extended 
liberty:    wise   laws,  justly   administered:  r^^^^ 
a  beneficent  care  for  the  moral  and  social  c^f^y 
welfare  of  the  people:   freedom  of  trade  ™"^^* 
and  industry  :  lighter  and  more  equitable  taxation. 
Nor  were  these  great  changes  in  our  laws  and  policy 
effected   in   the   spirit   of  democracy.     They  were 
made  slowly,  temperately,  and  with  caution.     They 
were  preceded  by  laborious  inquiries,  by  discussion, 
experiments,   and  public  conviction.      Delays   and 
opposition  were  borne  patiently,  until  truth  steadily 
prevailed ;  and  when  a  sound  policy  was  at  length 
recognised,  it  was  adopted  and  carried  out,  even  by 
former  opponents.^ 

Freedom,  and  good  government,  a  generous  policy, 
and  the  devotion  of  rulers  to  the  welfare  of  ^^^^ 
the  people,  have  been  met  with  general  ^.JS^f' 
confidence,  loyalty,  and  contentment.    The  Soumgef 
great  ends  of  freedom  have  been  attained,  <^®°^°'^^'^'^i'- 

*  M.  Guizot,  who  never  conceals  his  distrust  of  democracy,  says  : 
*  In  the  legislation  of  the  country,  the  progress  is  immense  :  justice, 
disinterested  good  sense,  respect  for  all  rights,  consideration  for  all 
interests,  the  conscientious  and  searching  study  of  social  facts  and 
wants,  exercises  a  far  greater  sway  than  they  formerly  did,  in  the 
government  of  England :  in  its  domestic  matters,  and  as  regards  its 
daily  affairs,  England  is  assuredly  governed  much  more  equitably 
and  wisely.' — Life  of  Sirli.  Feel,  p.  373. 


42  2  Progress  of  L  egislatio7t. 

in  an  enlightened  and  responsible  rule,  apjjroved  by 
the  judgment  of  the  governed.  The  constitution, 
having  worked  out  the  aims,  and  promoted  the  just 
interests  of  society,  has  gained  upon  democracy ; 
while  growing  wealth  and  prosperity  have  been 
powerful  auxiliaries  of  constitutional  government. 

To  achieve  these  great  objects,  ministers  and 
Pressure  of  Parliaments  have  laboured,  since  the  Re- 
siS^Sr      form  Act,  with  unceasing  energy  and  toil. 

lleformAct.    j^  j^gg  ^^^^  ^j^-^.^^  ^^^^^^  ^j^^  legislation  of 

a  century  was  accomplished.  The  inertness  and 
errors  of  past  ages  had  bequeathed  a  heavy  arrear 
to  lawgivers.  Parliament  had  long  been  wanting  in 
its  duty  of  '  devising  remedies  as  fast  as  time  breed- 
eth  mischief.'  ^  There  were  old  abuses  to  correct, — 
new  principles  to  establish, — powerful  interests  and 
confirmed  prejudices  to  overcome, — the  ignorance, 
neglect,  and  mistaken  policy  of  centuries  to  review. 
Every  department  of  legislation, — civil,  ecclesias- 
tical, legal,  commercial,  and  financial, — demanded 
revision.  And  this  prodigious  work,  when  shaped 
and  fashioned  in  council,  had  to  pass  through  the 
fiery  ordeal  of  a  popular  assembly, — to  encounter 
opposition  and  unrestrained  freedom  of  debate, — 
the  conflict  of  parties, — popular  agitation, — the  tur- 
moil of  elections, — and  lastly,  the  delays  and  reluc- 
tance of  the  House  of  Lords,  which  still  cherished 
the  spirit  and  sympathies  of  the  past.  And  further, 
this  work  had  to  be  slowly  wrought  out  in  a  Parlia- 
ment of  wide  remedial  jurisdiction, — the  Grrand 
Inquest  of  the  nation.  Ours  is  not  a  council  of 
^  Lord  Bacon  ;  Pacification  of  tlie  Chnrcli. 


Activity  of  Parliament.  423 

sages  for  framing  laws,  and  planning  amendments  of 
tlie  constitution:  but  a  free  and  vigorous  Parlia- 
ment, which  watches  over  the  destinies  of  an  empire. 
It  arraigns  ministers  :  directs  their  policy,  and  con- 
trols the  administration  of  affairs :  it  listens  to  every 
grievance ;  and  inquires,  complains,  and  censures. 
Such  are  its  obligations  to  freedom;  and  such  its 
paramount  trust  and  duty.  Its  first  care  is  that 
the  state  be  well  governed :  its  second  that  the  laws" 
be  amended.  These  functions  of  a  Grand  Inquest 
received  a  strong  impulse  from  Parliamentary  Ee- 
form,  and  were  exercised  with  a  vigour  characteristic 
of  a  more  popular  representation.  Again,  there  was 
the  necessary  business  of  every  session, — provision 
for  the  public  service,  the  scrutiny  of  the  national 
expenditure,  and  multifarious  topics  of  incidental 
discussion,  ever  arising  in  a  free  Parliament.  Yet, 
notwithstanding  all  these  obstacles,  legislation 
marched  onwards.  The  strain  and  pressure  were 
great,  but  they  were  borne ;  ^  and  the  results  may 
be  recounted  with  pride.  Not  only  was  a  great 
arrear  overtaken :  but  the  labours  of  another  gene- 
ration were,  in  some  measure,  anticipated.  An  ex- 
hausting harvest  was  gathered :  but  there  is  yet 
ample  work  for  the  gleaners ;  and  a  soil  that  claims 
incessant  cultivation.  'A  free  government,'  says 
Machiavel,  '  in  order  to  maintain  itself  free,  hath 
need,  every  day,  of  some  new  provisions  in  favour  of 
liberty.'     Parliament  must  be  watchful  and  earnest, 

'  The  extent  of  these  labours  is  shown  in  the  reports  of  Com- 
mittees on  Public  business  in  1848,  1855,  and  1861 ;  in  a  pamphlet, 
by  the  author,  on  that  subject,  1849  ;  and  in  the  Edinburgh  Eeview, 
Jan.  1854,  Art.  vii. 


424  Progress  of  Legislation. 

lest  its  labours  be  undone.  Nor  will  its  popular 
constitution  again  suffer  it  to  cherish  the  perverted 
optimism  of  the  last  century,  which  discovered  per- 
fection in  everything  as  it  was,  and  danger  in  every 
innovation. 

Even  the  foreign  relations  of  England  were  affected 
Foreign  ^J  ^^^  domestic  liberty.  When  kings  and 
affectedby  ^oblcs  govcmed,  their  sympathies  were 
freedom.  ^^^j^  crowQcd  hcads :  when  the  people  were 
admitted  to  a  share  in  the  government,  England 
favoured  constitutional  freedom  in  other  states  ;  and 
became  the  idol  of  every  nation  which  cherished  the 
same  aspirations  as  herself. 

This  history  is  now  completed.  However  un- 
conciusion.  worthy  of  its  great  theme,  it  may  yet  serve 
to  illustrate  a  remarkable  period  of  progress  and 
renovation,  in  the  laws  and  liberties  of  England. 
Tracing  the  later  development  of  the  constitution, 
it  concerns  our  own  time,  and  present  franchises. 
It  shows  how  the  encroachments  of  power  were  re- 
pelled, and  popular  rights  acquired,  without  revolu- 
tion :  how  constitutional  liberty  was  won,  and  de- 
mocracy reconciled  with  time-honoured  institutions. 
It  teaches  how  freedom  and  enlightenment,  inspiring 
the  national  councils  with  wisdom,  promoted  the 
good  government  of  the  state,  and  the  welfare  and 
contentment  of  society.  Such  political  examples  as 
these  claim  the  study  of  the  historian  and  philo- 
sopher, the  reflection  of  the  statesman,  and  the 
gratulations  of  every  free  people. 


425 


SUPPLEMENTARY  CHAPTER. 

1861—1871. 


REVIEW  OP   POLITICAI,   PEOGBESS   SINCE  1860  '. — TRANQUIIXTTY  TJNDER 

LOED  palmeeston: — HIS  death: — EAEL  eussell's  eefobm  bill, 
1866  : — ^EEFOEM  acts  of  eael  of  deeby  and  me.  diseaejj,  1867- 
1868: — ^disestablishment  of  the  ieish  chuech: — ieish  land 

act  : — settlement    of    chuech-eate    question  i  university 

tksts  : eepeal  of  ecclesiastical  titles  act  : — education  : 

the  ballot. 


The  century  comprised  in  this  history  was  a  period 
of  remarkable  constitutional  progress.    The  constitu- 
political  abuses  of  many  ages  were  cor-  chTn^, 
rected ;  and  om*  laws  and  institutions  judi-  ^^^*^i^fio- 
ciously  improved  and  developed.    While  other  states 
were  convulsed  by  revolutions,  English  liberties  were 
steadily  advancing  without  violence  or  tumult.    The 
influence  of  the  crown  was  constantly  diminished, 
and  ministerial  responsibility  increased.     The  poli- 
tical ascendency  of  the  House  of  Peers  was  reduced. 
The  House  of  Commons,  purged  of  corruption,  and 
casting  off  its  dependence  upon  patrons,  received  a 
vast  increase  of  power  from  a  wider  representation 
of  the  people,  while  it  became  more  responsible  to 
the  country,  and  more  sensitive  to  public  opinion. 

Meanwhile,  the  press  attained  a  power  which  had 
never  been  conceived  in  any  constitutional  system. 


426         Political  Progress  since  i860. 

Irresponsible  itself,  but  at  once  forming  and  express- 
ing the  sentiments  of  the  people,  it  swayed  the  coun- 
cils of  responsible  rulers.  In  alliance  with  the  press, 
political  agitation  exercised  a  potent  influence  over 
the  executive  government  and  the  legislatui'e. 

No  less  remarkable  was  the  change  in  the  relations 
of  the  church  to  the  state,  and  to  the  community. 
The  supremacy  of  the  state  church  had  been  main- 
tained by  a  penal  code  for  the  repression  and  dis- 
couragement of  Eoman  Catholics  and  nonconformists. 
Within  this  period  every  restraint  upon  freedom  of 
conscience,  and  every  civil  disability,  was  swept 
away.  Religious  freedom  and  equality  had  become 
the  settled  policy  of  the  state. 

Such  were  the  changes  in  the  laws  and  liberties 
of  England,  which  distinguished  this  period  of  our 
history.  Let  us  now  approach  the  consideration  of 
our  political  progress  since  1860. 

The  five  first  years  of  this  period  were  marked  by 
Political  unusual  political  tranquillity.  The  discus- 
uifdS'iS  sions  upon  Parliamentary  reform,  in  1860, 
Paimerston.  j^^^  failed  to  awakeu  any  excitement,  or 
even  interest,  in  favour  of  further  electoral  changes. 
After  thirty  years  of  agitation,  and  legislative  activity, 
the  minds  of  men  appeared  to  be  at  rest.  The 
Crimean  war,  and  the  Indian  mutiny,  had  served  to 
divert  public  attention  from  domestic  politics ;  and 
the  great  civil  conflict  in  the  United  States  en- 
grossed the  thoughts  of  all  classes  of  Englishmen. 

Such  being  the  sentiments  and  temper  of  the 
country,  the  venerable  statesman  who  directed  its 
policy,  as  first  minister,  was  little  inclined  to  disturb 


Lord  Palmerston  Premier.  427 

them  by  startling  experiments  in  legislation.  No 
ruler  was  ever  more  impressed  with  the  practical 
wisdom  of  the  maxim '  quieta  non  movete,^  than  Lord 
Palmerston,  in  the  last  years  of  his  long  political 
life.  Originally  an  enlightened  member  of  that 
party  which  had  been  opposed  to  change,  he  had 
developed  into  a  member  of  the  liberal  administra- 
tion, which  had  carried  the  Keform  Act  of  1832. 
Henceforward  he  frankly  accepted  the  policy,  and 
shared  the  fortunes,  of  the  liberal  party,  until  he  be- 
came their  popular  leader.  He  had  outlived  some 
generations  of  his  countrymen :  he  had  borne  a  part 
in  the  political  strifes  of  more  than  half  a  century : 
he  had  observed "  revolutions  abroad,  and  organic 
changes  at  home  :  and  in  these,  his  latter  days,  he 
was  disposed,  as  well  by  conviction  as  by  tempera- 
ment, to  favour  political  tranquillity.  Of  rare  saga- 
city, and  ripe  judgment,  it  had  long  been  his  habit 
to  regard  public  affairs  from  a  practical  rather  than  a 
theoretical  point  of  view ;  and  the  natural  inertness 
of  age  could  not  fail  to  discourage  an  experimental 
policy. 

The  miscarriage  of  the  Eeform  Bill  of  1860  had 
demonstrated  the  composure  of  the  public  mind ;  and 
Lord  Palmerston  perceived  that  in  a  policy  of  inac- 
tion he  could  best  satisfy  the  present  judgment  of 
the  country,  and  his  own  matured  opinions. 

Such  an  attitude,  if  it  alienated  the  more  advanced 
section  of  his  supporters,  was  congenial  to  the  great 
body  of  the  Whigs,  and  disarmed  the  opposition, 
who  were  convinced  that  his  rule  would  insure  the 
maintenance  of  a  Conservative  policy. 


428         Political  Progress  since  i860. 

Hence,  during  his  life,  the  condition  of  the  country 
may  be  described  as  one  of  political  repose.  There 
was  no  great  agitation  or  popular  movement:  no 
pressure  from  without:  while  within  the  walls  of 
Parliament  this  adroit  and  popular  minister  con- 
trived at  once  to  attach  his  friends,  and  to  conciliate 
his  opponents. 

The  question  of  parliamentary  reform,  now  dropped 
Attempts  to  ^7  ^^  Grovemment ,  was  occasionally  pressed 
^Sif  forward  by  other  members.  In  1851,  Mr. 
of  1832.  Locke  Eling  sought  to  lower  the  county 
franchise  to  lOL,  and  Mr.  Baines  to  reduce  the 
borough  franchise  to  6L ;  but  neither  of  these  pro- 
posals found  favour  with  the  House  of  Commons. 

Again,  in  1864,  these  proposals  were  repeated, 
without  success,  though  supported  by  strong  mino- 
rities. Meanwhile,  reformers  were  perplexed  by 
the  utterances  of  statesmen.  The  veteran  reformer. 
Earl  Eussell,  had  lately  counselled  the  people  of 
Scotland  to  '  rest  and  be  thankful ; '  while  Mr.  Grlad- 
stone  earnestly  advocated  the  claims  of  working 
men  to  the  suffrage,  and  contended  that  '  every  man 
who  is  not  presumably  incapacitated  by  some  per- 
sonal unfitness,  or  political  danger,  is  morally  en- 
titled to  come  within  the  pale  of  the  constitution.' 

In  1865,  Mr.  Baines'  bill  revived  the  discussion 
of  parliamentary  reform.  Though  supported  by 
Grovernment,  it  was  defeated  by  a  considerable  majo- 
rity. The  debate  was  signalised  by  a  protest  against 
democracy  by  Mr.  Lowe,  which  foreshadowed  his 
relations  to  his  own  party,  and  to  the  cause  of 
reform,  at  no  distant  period. 


Earl  Russell  Preiniei^  429 

After  this  session,  Parliament,  which  had  exceeded 
the  usual  span  of  Parliamentary  life,*  was  Dissointion 
dissolved.  The  elections  were  not  marked  men^ises. 
by  the  excitements  of  a  severe  party  conflict:  no 
distinct  issue  was  referred  to  the  constituencies ; 
and  general  confidence  in  Lord  Palmerston  was 
relied  upon  by  candidates  rather  than  any  special 
policy  :  but  the  Liberal  party  gained  a  considerable 
accession  of  strensrth. 

There  was,  however,  one  memorable  election.    Mr. 
Gladstone,  who  had  represented  the  Uni-  Mr.  Giad- 
versity  of  Oxford  for  eighteen  years,  lost  jected  bythe 

,.  ,  ir.rMiT  University 

nis  seat,  and  was  returned  for  South  Lan-  of  Oxford, 
cashire.     As  member  for  the  University  his  career 
was  always  restrained  and  trammelled :  as  member 
for  a  great  manufacturing  and  commercial  county,  he 
was  free  to  become  the  leader  of  the  Liberal  party. 

At  length  in  October,   1865,  the  aged  premier 
died,  at  the  summit  of  his  power  and  popu-  Death  of 

^      'X.  AX.  -u  Lord  Pal- 

larity;  and  at  once  a  change  came  over  merston. 
the  national  councils.  He  was  succeeded  by  Earl 
Eussell,  the  acknowledged  leader  of  the  EariRnsseu 
Whigs,  and  the  statesman  most  associated  ^^""^• 
with  Parliamentary  reform.  He  had  felt  deeply  the 
loss  of  his  own  measure  in  1860,  and  the  subsequent 
relations  of  Lord  Palmerston's  government  to  its 
policy.  They  had  fought  their  way  into  office  as 
the  champions  of  reform,  and  at  the  first  check,  had 
abandoned  it.  For  five  years  they  had  been  content 
to  rule  and  prosper,  without  doing  further  homage 
to   that  cause;  and   now  Earl   Russell,  Mr.  Glad- 

^  TJpwards  of  six  3'ears. 


430         Political  Progress  since  i860. 

stone,  and  other  members  of  the  cabinet  would  no 
longer  submit  to  the  reproach  of  insincerity.  Nor 
was  a  change  of  policy,  at  this  time,  dictated  merely 
by  a  sense  of  honour  and  consistency.  It  rested  upon 
a  continued  conviction  of  the  necessity  of  such  a 
measure,  in  the  interests  of  the  state,  and  in  fulfil- 
ment of  obligations  which  Parliament,  no  less  than 
ministers,  had  assumed.  And  further  it  was  deemed 
politic,  with  a  view  to  satisfy  the  long-deferred  hopes 
of  the  more  advanced  members  of  the  Liberal  party. 
Accordingly,  in  the  autumn,  Earl  Eussell  an- 
Hevivaiof  nouuced  that  the  consideration  of  reform 
Story  would  be  renewed  in  the  approaching  ses- 
'^^^''^'        sion. 

There  were,  however,  some  considerations,  not 
considera-  Sufficiently  weighed  at  the  time,  which  had  a 
toTtlSti?-^  disastrous  influence  over  the  fate  of  mini- 
™*^^*'  sters,  and  of  the  measure  to  which  they  stood 

committed.  Parliament  had  recently  been  dissolved, 
while  Lord  Palmerston  was  still  minister,  and  reform 
had  been  treated,  upon  the  hustings,  with  little  more 
earnestness  than  in  the  House  of  Commons.  Hence 
the  cause  was  without  the  impulse  of  a  popular  de- 
mand. Again,  a  large  proportion  of  the  members,  re- 
turned at  the  general  election,  sharing  the  sentiments 
of  Lord  Palmerston  and  the  late  Parliament,  had 
no  inclination  to  disturb  the  political  calm  of  the 
past  few  years.  But  above  all,  in  this,  the  first  ses- 
sion of  a  new  Parliament,  members  were  invited  to 
recast  the  constitution  of  the  House  of  Commons, 
many  of  them  to  forfeit  their  seats,  and  all  to  re- 
tm-n  speedily  to  their  constituents.      The  political 


Earl  Russell's  Reform  Bill  43 1 

situation,  indeed,  may  be  compared  to  a  feast  offered 
to  guests  who  had  lately  dined. 

At  the  first  meeting  of  the  Cabinet  after  Lord 
Palmerston's  funeral,  ministers  had  taken  Eari  rus- 
means  to  collect  ample  electoral  statistics :  ^  B^^'f  ^^*'"" 
and  early  in  the  session  of  1866  were  prepared  to 
submit  their  proposals  to  Parliament.  Warned  by 
the  obstacles  which  a  comprehensive  measmre  had 
encountered  in  1860,  they  confined  their  scheme  to 
a  revision  of  the  franchise,  reserving  for  another 
session  the  embarrassing  problem  of  a  re-distribution 
of  seats.  It  was  proposed  to  reduce  the  occupation 
franchise  in  counties  to  14^.  annual  value,  and  in 
boroughs  to  11.  The  addition  to  the  voters  was  esti- 
mated at  400,000,  of  which  one-half  would  be  work- 
ing men.  This  measure,  however  moderate  and 
cautious,  was  at  once  beset  with  difficulties.  Though 
falling  short  of  the  views  of  Mr.  Bright  and  the 
radicals,  it  was  supported  by  them  as  an  'honest 
measure.'  But  it  was  denounced  by  the  Conserva- 
tives, and  even  by  several  Whigs,  as*  democratic  and 
revolutionary;  and  an  alarming  defection  'TheCave.' 
soon  disclosed  itself  in  the  ministerial  ranks.  Com- 
prising about  forty  members,  it  numbered  among  its 
leaders  Mr.  Lowe,  Mr.  Horsman,  Mr.  Laing,  Lord 
Elcho,  Earl  Grosvenor,  and  Lord  Dunkellin.  This 
party  was  humorously  compared  by  Mr.  Bright 
with  those  who  had  gathered  in  the  '  cave  of 
Adullam,'  by  which  name  it  was  henceforth  famili-* 
arly  known. 

*  Mr.  Gladstone's  speech  on  introducing  the  English  Reform  Bill.. 
March  12th,  1866. 


432  Political  Progress  since  i860. 

The  first  weak  point  in  the  scheme  which  was 
EariGros-     assailed,  was  the   omission   of   a  redistri- 

VGiior*s 

amendment,  bution  of  seats.  This  was  brought  to  an 
issue  by  an  amendment  of  Earl  Grrosvenor,  on  the 
second  reading  of  the  bill,  when  ministers,  after  a 
spirited  debate  of  eight  nights,  and  in  a  very  full 
house,  escaped  defeat  by  five  votes  only.^  Deferring 
to  the  opinion  of  so  large  a  minority,  ministers 
promised  a  bill  for  the  redistribution  of  seats,  and  re- 
Biii3  for  the  form  bills  for  Scotland  and  Ireland,  before 
andre-distri-  they  proceeded  with  the  original  measure. 
seats  united.  Qu  the  7th  May,these  bills  were  introduced. 
By  the  redistribution  of  seats  bill,  thirty  boroughs 
having  a  population  under  8,000  lost  one  member,  and 
nineteen  other  seats  were  obtained  by  the  grouping 
of  smaller  boroughs, — forty-nine  seats  being  available 
for  larger  places.  Though  sharply  criticised,  this 
bill  was  read  a  second  time  without  a  division  :  but 
ministers  were  obliged  to  agree  to  a  proposal  of  Mr. 
Bouverie  to  refer  it  and  the  franchise  bill  to  the 
same  committee,  with  a  view  to  their  consolidation. 
Nor  was  this  all :  the  measure  was  already  too  large 
to  be  fully  discussed,  when  Sir  E.  Knightley  carried 
an  instruction  to  the  committee,  by  a  majority  of 
ten,  to  provide  for  the  better  prevention  of  bribery 
and  corruption  at  elections. 

In  committee  Lord  Stanley  moved,  without  notice, 
Continued  the  postponement  of  the  franchise  clauses ; 
the  bill.  but  was  defeated  by  a  majority  of  twenty- 
seven.  Mr.  Walpole  moved  that  the  occupation 
francliise  in  counties  should  be  raised  to  20^.,  and  his 
»  Ayes.  318;  Noes,  313. 


Earl  of  Derby  Premier.  433 

amendment  was  lost  by  fourteen  votes  only.  Mr. 
Hunt  proposed  that  the  county  franchise  should  be 
based  on  rating  instead  of  rental,  and  was  resisted 
by  a  majority  of  seven  ;  and  lastly,  Lord  Dunkellin 
moved  a  similar  amendment  in  regard  to  boroughs, 
which  was  carried  against  the  government,  by  a 
majority  of  eleven. 

Ministers  now  perceived  that  the  game  was  lost. 
They  had  declared  their  resolution  to  stand  Resigna. 
or  fall  by  their  bill ;  and  its  fate  was  be-  ministers. 
yond  hope  of  recovery.  They  submitted  their  resig- 
nation to  the  Queen,  who  hesitated  to  accept  it; 
and  a  vote  of  confidence  was  about  to  be  moved 
with  a  view  to  re-establish,  them,  when  they  finally 
determined  to  resign.^  Their  defeat,  indeed,  had  been 
sustained  upon  a  question  of  secondary  importance, 
and  might  have  been  repaired  at  a  later  stage  of 
the  bill :  but  they  had  been  sorely  pressed  on  other 
occasions  :  their  party  was  disorganised  and  broken 
up  :  it  was  plainly  impossible  to  pass  the  bill,  and 
they  could  not  abandon  it  without  discredit. 

Such  was  the  issue  of  this  infelicitous  measure. 
A  strong  ministry  was   ruined;    a  trium-  Eariof 
phant  party  overthrown  \  and  the  minority  mier,  1866. 
again  placed  in  power,  under  the  Earl  of  Derby. 
But  events  of  higher  importance  resulted  popular 
from  the  miscarriage  of  this  measure.    For  a^ta*io°- 
some  years,  reformers  had  been  indifferent  and  inert : 
when  Earl  Eussell  promised  reform,  they  trusted  him, 

*  Mr.  Cra^vford,  member  for  the  City  of  London,  was  on  the  point 
of  rising  to  give  notice  of  a  vote  of  confidence,  when  he  receiyed  a 
letter  from  Earl  Russell  announcing  his  resignation. 

VOL.  III.  r  F 


434        Political  Progress  since  1 860. 

and  were  calm  and  hopeful:  but  now  that  he  had 
been  driven  from  power,  and  supplanted  by  the 
opponents  of  reform,  they  became  restless  and  tur- 
bulent. The  spirit  of  democracy  was  again  awakened, 
and  the  new  government  were  soon  brought  into 
Hyde  Park  collisiou  with  it.  A  meeting  in  Hyde 
23rd,' 18G J.  Park  had  been  announced  by  the  Eeform 
League  for  July  23rd,  as  a  demonstration  in  favour 
of  an  extension  of  the  suffrage.  Ministers  being 
advised  that  the  crown  had  power  to  prevent  such  a 
meeting  in  a  Eoyal  Park,^  and  fearful  of  a  disturb- 
ance to  the  public  peace,  instructed  the  police  to 
close  the  gates  of  the  park,  and  prevent  the  entrance 
of  the  multitudes  expected  to  assemble  there.  The 
gates  were  accordingly  barred;  and  the  leaders  of 
the  League,  on  being  refused  admittance,  proceeded, 
according  to  previous  arrangement,  to  Trafalgar 
Square  to  hold  their  meeting.  Meanwhile,  the 
park  gates  were  securely  held,  and  a  considerable 
police  force  was  collected  inside.  But  the  vast  en- 
closure was  without  protection,  and  the  mob,  pulling 
down  the  railings,  rushed  through  every  breach,  and 
took  forcible  possession  of  the  park.  Democracy 
had  overcome  the  government ;  and  the  maintenance 
of  order  was  afterwards  due,  as  much  to  the  exertions 
of  Mr.  Beales  and  the  Eeform  League,  as  to  the  police. 
These  events  increased  the  public  excitement, 
Impulse  and  encouraged  the  activity  of  the  re- 
reform,        formers.     Several  important  meetings  and 

*  This  right  had  been  affirmed  in  1855  by  an  opinion  of  the  Law 
Officers  of  the  Crown,  Sir  A.  Cockburn  and  Sir  K.  Bethell,  and  of 
Mr.  WiUes. 


Earl  of  Derby  s  Reform  Bill,  iZ^'].   435. 

popular  demonstrations  were  held,  which  stirred  the 
public  mind:  while  political  imeasiness  and  dis- 
contents were  aggravated  by  commercial  distress 
and  an  indifferent  harvest. 

Public  opinion  had,  at  length,  been  aroused   in 
favour    of     reform:    but    the    House    of  position  of 
Commons  had  lately  shown  its  disinclina-  ^^^l 
tion  to  deal  with  that  question;  and  the  *<'^«^<*™* 
party   of  whom  the  new   ministry  was   composed, 
aided  by  a  strong  body  of  Whigs,  had  defeated  Earl 
Eussell's  moderate  measure,  as  revolutionary.   Would 
ministers  resist  reform,  and  count  upon  the  support 
of  their  new  allies  :  or  venture  upon  another  reform 
bill,  and  trust  for  success  to  adroit  management, 
and  the  divisions  in  the  Liberal  party  ? 

These  questions  were  set  at  rest,  at  the  opening 
of  the  session,  by  the  announcement  of  a  -^^^^q^^^, 
reform  bill  in  the  Queen's  speech.  No  ^^e^Ufo^ 
position  could  be  more  embarrassing  for  a  ■^^^^" 
government.  In  a  minority  of  seventy  in  the  House 
of  Commons :  representing  a  party  opposed  to  the 
principles  of  reform  :  brought  into  power  by  resist- 
ing such  a  measure  when  offered  by  the  late  govern- 
ment: confronted  by  a  strong  party  in  the  House 
pledged  to  reform,  and  by  popular  agitation :  in  what 
manner  could  they  venture  to  approach  this  perilous 
question  ?  At  first  they  invited  the  House  no  longer 
to  treat  reform  as  a  party  question,  but  to  concert 
a  satisfactory  measure  in  friendly  consultation ;  and 
for  this  purpose  they  offered  to  submit  resolutions 
as  the  basis  of  a  bill.     Such  a  course  was  Mr  pis- 

raeli's  reso- 

naturally  objected  to,  as   being  designed  lutions. 

F  F  2 


43^        Political P^^ogress  since  i860. 

to  evade  ministerial  responsibility ;  and  when  the 
resolutions  appeared,  they  proved  too  vague  and 
ambiguous  for  effective  discussion.  In  explaining- 
them,  indeed,  Mr.  Disraeli  sketched  the  outline  of 
the  ministerial  scheme :  but  they  were  eventually 
withdrawn;  and  ministers  were  forced  to  commit 
themselves  to  more  definite  proposals.  And  here  the 
difficulties  of  their  position  were  disclosed  by  the 
resignation  of  three  members  of  the  Cabinet — the 
Earl  of  Carnarvon,  Lord  Cranborne,  and  Greneral 
Peel.  Their  reluctance  had  already  induced  the 
government  to  sketch  out  a  less  bold  scheme  than 
their  colleagues  had  been  prepared  to  propose  ;  and 
their  retirement,  otherwise  a  source  of  weakness, 
now  enabled  the  Cabinet  to  agree  upon  a  more  ex- 
tended measure. 

At  length,  on  the  18th  March,  the  bill,  which 
Earl  of  -^^^  caused  so  much  expectation,  was  in- 
RrfiSf  troduced.  The  franchise  was  granted  in 
^^^^'  boroughs    to    every    householder    paying 

rates,  who  had  resided  for  two  years :  in  counties  to 
every  occupier  rated  at  \5l, ;  and  there  were  added 
various  franchises,  based  upon  education  and  the  pay- 
ment of  taxes.  As  a  counterpoise  to  the  extended 
occupation  suffrage,  a  scheme  of  dual  voting  was 
proposed  for  voters  of  a  higher  qualification.  There 
was  to  be  a  redistribution  of  thirty  seats. 

The  scheme  was  founded  throughout  upon  the 
Its  securities  principle  of  securities  and  compensations, 

andcompen-  •  p       i  •    i  i 

sations.  the  couceptiou  of  which  was  due  to  the 
peculiar  relations  of  the  Grovernment  to  different 
parties.    Household  suffrage  in  boroughs,  the  distinc- 


Earl  of  Derby  s  Reform  Bill,  \Z6^.   437 

tive  principle  of  Mr.  Bright  and  the  radicals,  had  also 
found  favour  with  Mr.  Henley,  Mr.  Walpole,  Sir 
Roundell  Palmer,  and  a  certain  section  of  the  Conser- 
vatives ;  and  could  not  be  opposed  by  the  Whigs,  with- 
out an  open  breach  with  advanced  reformers.  On  the 
other  hand,  it  was  qualified  by  a  two  years'  residence, 
by  the  personal  payment  of  rates,  by  voting  papers, 
by  education  and  tax-paying  franchises,  and  by 
dual  voting.  These  securities,  as  they  were  called, 
against  a  democratic  franchise,  commended  the 
mieasure  to  the  Conservative  party ;  but  their  fu- 
tility had  been  apparent  to  the  seceding  ministers,  and 
was  soon  to  be  proved  by  their  successive  rejection 
or  abandonment.  The  measure  embraced  proposals 
calculated  to  please  all  parties  ;  and  ministers  were 
prepared  to  assent  to  any  amendments  by  which  its 
ultimate  character  should  be  determined  by  the 
majority.  The  results  may  be  briefly  Ka^timate 
told.  Household  suffrage  in  boroughs  was  ^*'™* 
maintained,  with  one  year's  residence  instead  of 
two ;  the  county  franchise  was  reduced  to  12L ;  a 
lodger  franchise  was  added ;  the  higher  class  fran- 
chises, the  dual  votes,  and  voting  papers  disappeared 
from  the  bill;  and  the  disqualification  of  large 
numbers  of  compound  householders  was  averted. 

The  scheme  for  the  redistribution  of  seats  was 
also  enlarged.  Every  provision  which  had  recon- 
ciled Conservatives  to  the  measure  was  struck  out : 
every  amendment  urged  by  the  liberal  party  was 
grafted  upon  the  bill.  And  thus  the  House  of  Com- 
mons found  itself  assenting,  inch  by  inch,  to  an  ex- 
tended scheme  of  reform,  which  neither  Conserva- 


43^        Political  Progress  since  \Z6o. 

tives  nor  "WTiigs  wholly  approved.  Parties  had  been 
played  off  against  one  another,  until  a  measure 
which  gratified  none  but  advanced  reformers, — pro- 
bably not  more  than  a  sixth  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons,— was  accepted,  as  a  necessity,  by  all. 

While  the  bill  was  under  discussion  in  the  House 
Meeting  in  of  Commous,  the  public  excitement  gave 
May  6, 1867.  au  impulse  to  the  Liberal  party,  in  passing 
every  amendment  favourable  to  extended  franchises ► 
And  one  remarkable  episode  illustrated  at  once  the 
strength  of  popular  sentiment,  and  the  impotence  of 
the  executive  Grovernment  to  resist  it.  A  great  de- 
monstration in  favour  of  reform  was  announced  to 
take  place  on  the  6th  May,  in  Hyde  Park,  when  Mr. 
Walpole,  the  Home  Secretary,  not  profiting  by  liis 
sore  experience  of  the  previous  year,  issued  a  procla- 
mation, stating  that  the  use  of  the  park  for  the 
holding  of  such  meeting  was  not  permitted,  and 
warning  and  admonishing  all  persons  to  refrain  frora 
attending  it.  But,  in  spite  of  this  proclamation,  the 
meeting  was  held,  and  large  assemblages  of  people 
occupied  the  park,  without  disorder  or  disturbance. 

The  right  of  the  Grovernment  to  prohibit  the 
meeting  was  contested  not  only  by  Mr.  Beales  and 
the  Eeform  League,  but  by  Mr.  Bright  and  many 
other  members  of  the  Liberal  party.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  conduct  of  the  Grovernment  in  first  pro- 
hibiting the  meeting,  and  then  allowing  it  to  take 
place,  in  defiance  of  their  authority,  was  cen- 
sured as  bringing  the  executive  into  contempt. 
In  deference  to  the  strong  opinions  expressed  upon 
this  subject,  Mr.  Walpole  resigTied  the  seals  of  the 


I 


Earlof  Derby  s  Reform  Bill,  iS6 J,    439 

Home  Department,   but   retained   his  seat  in  the 
Cabinet. 

Meanwhile,  the  state  of  the  law  in  reference  to 
the  use  of  the  parks  for  public  meetings  was  unsatiafac 
so  unsatisfactory,  that  the  Grovernment  had  th7ilw.*^  *^ 
brought  in  a  bill  to  prohibit,  under  the  penalties  of  a 
misdemeanour,  the  holding  of  any  meeting  in  the 
royal  parks,  without  the  consent  of  the  crown.  This 
bill  being  violently  opposed,  was  overtaken  by  the 
close  of  the  session,  and  abandoned ;  and  the  law  has 
still  been  left  uncertain,  and  incapable  of  enforcement. 
It  cannot  be  questioned  that  the  meetings  of  1866, 
and  1867,  should  either  have  been  allowed,  or  effec- 
tually prevented.  The  latter  course  could  only  be 
taken  at  the  risk  of  bloody  collisions  with  the 
people ;  and  accordingly  such  meetings  have  since 
been  permitted,  and  have  signally  failed  as  popular 
demonstrations."^ 

In  the  House  of  Lords,  several  amendments  were 
made  to  the  Eeform  Bill;  but  the  only  proceedings 
one  of  importance  agreed  to  by  the  Com-  npJn^tS*'^ 
mons  was  a  clause  of  Lord  Cairns,  provid-  ^^o"^^"^* 
ing,  with  a  view  to  the  representation  of  minorities, 
that  in  places  returning  three  members,  no  elector 
should  vote  for  more  than  two  candidates.  * 

The  scheme  of  enfranchisement,  however,  was  not 
yet  complete.  The  settlement  of  the  bound-  Bonndanes 
aries  of  boroughs  and  the  divisions  of  coun-  o^J«^ough3 
ties  was  referred  to  a  commission,  and  the  *^<'"°'^^^- 
consideration  of  the  reform  bills  for  Scotland  and 
Ireland  was  postponed  until  the  next  session. 

»  Such  meetings  were  regulated  by  Act  in  1872. 


440        Political  Progress  since  i860. 

Before  these  measures  were  introduced,  in  1868, 
ation  ^^^  ^^^^  ^^  Derby  was  obliged  by  ill-health 
DeSy!  °^  ^^  retire,  and  was  succeeded  as  Premier  by 
Mr.  Disraeu  ^^'  Disraeli,  to  whose  extraordinary  tact, 
Premier.  judgment,  and  address  the  passing  of  the 
English  Eeform  Act  was  acknowledged  to  be  due. 
Many  difficult  questions  remained  to  be  settled, 
which  needed  the  exercise  of  all  his  abilities.  The 
The  Scotch  Scotch  Eeform  Bill,  founded  generally  upon 
1868.  '  the  same  principles  as  the  English  bill,  pro- 
posed an  increase  of  seven  members  to  represent 
Scotland.  This  provision  contemplated  an  addition 
to  the  number  of  the  House  of  Commons,  which  was 
resisted ;  and  justice  to  the  claims  of  Scotland  was 
eventually  met  by  the  disfranchisement  of  seven 
English  boroughs  having  less  than  5,000  inhabitants ; 
and  in  this  form  the  bill  for  the  representation  of 
Scotland  was  passed. 

The  Eeform  Bill  for  Ireland  left  the  county  fran- 
The  Irish      chiso  Unaltered,  reduced  the  borouQ'h  fran- 

RefonaAct,      ,  .  ,  ,  ,  •    -,         i-        .-,        . 

1868.  chise,  and  proposed  a  partial  redistribution 

of  seats,  which  was  shortly  abandoned.  The  measure, 
avowedly  incomplete,  and  unequal  to  the  English  and 
Scotch  schemes,  was  nevertheless  assented  to,  as  at 
least  a  present  settlement  of  a  question  beset  with 
exceptional  difficulties. 

The  boundaries  of  the  English  boroughs  and  the 
Boundaries  ^^^  divisious  of  couutics  wcro  stiU  to  be 
of^boroughs  settled ;  and,  after  an  inquiry  by  a  select 
counties.  committee,  the  boundaries,  as  defined  by 
the  commissioners,  were,  with  several  modifications, 
agreed  to. 


Reform  Acts,  1867-1868.  441 

The  series  of  measures  affecting  the  electoral 
system  was  not  even  yet  concluded.  A  Election 
measure  was,  after  long  discussions,  agreed  Sd  co^pt 
to,  for  transferring  the  cherished  jurisdic-  ActfiS. 
tion  of  the  Commons,  in  matters  of  election,  to  judges 
of  the  superior  courts,  and  for  amending  the  laws  in 
restraint  of  corrupt  practices.  And,  lastly,  a  bill  was 
passed  to  facilitate  the  registration  of  the  year,  so 
as  to  insure  the  election  of  a  Parliament  during  the 
autumn,  by  the  new  electors. 

These  measures  for  extending  the  representation 
of  the  people  were  little  less  important  constitu. 
than  the  great  Eeform  Acts  of  1832.     The  pSanSof 
new  franchises  embraced  large  numbers  of  suri  ™  ^ 
the  working  classes,  and  greatly  enlarged  the  basis 
of  electoral  power.     At   the  same  time,  a  certain 
counterpoise  to  household  suffrage  was  found  in  the 
addition   of  twenty-five   members   to  the   English 
counties,  which  their  population  fully  justified,  and 
the  withdrawal  of  thirty-three  members  from  Eng- 
lish boroughs. 

Considering  how  this  great  constitutional  change 
had  been  accomplished, — not  by  the  deliberate 
judgment  of  statesmen,  but  by  the  force  of  circum- 
stances,— its  results  were,  not  unnaturally,  viewed 
with  grave  misgivings.  The  Earl  of  Derby  himself 
had  said,  '  No  doubt  we  are  making  a  great  experi- 
ment, and  taking  a  leap  in  the  dark ; '  ^  and  many 
thoughtful  men  believed  the  state  to  be  approaching 
the  very  verge  of  democracy.  Nor  can  there  be  any 
reasonable  doubt  that  the  popidar  element  of  the 

•  August  6th  1867  ;  upon  the  question  'that  this  bill  do  pass.' 


442        Political  Progress  since  i^6o. 

constitution  acquired  a  decided  preponderance. 
Even  with  a  limited  franchise,  popular  influences 
had  prevailed;  and  an  extended  representation 
necessarily  invested  them  with  greater  force,  and 
clothed  them  with  more  authority.  Yet,  the 
sound  principles  of  these  measures  have  since 
been  generally  acknowledged.  If  the  settlement 
of  1832  was  to  be  disturbed, — ^and  no  one  contended 
for  its  perpetuity, — ^household  suffrage  was  an  ancient 
franchise  known  to  the  constitution :  it  had  been  ad- 
vocated in  1797  by  Mr.  Fox  and  Mr.  Grrey  :  it  found 
favour  with  men  of  widely  different  political  senti- 
ments ;  and  its  basis  was  broad  and  rational.  The 
redistribution  of  seats  was  unquestionably  judicious 
and  moderate. 

It  may  be  too  soon  yet  to  estimate  the  results  of 
the  new  constitution.  Eank,  property,  the  employ- 
ment of  labour,  and  other  social  influences,  have 
apparently  retained  their  ascendency ;  but  however 
the  popular  will  maybe  pronounced,  no  constitutional 
means  are  left  for  resisting  it.  At  once  to  lead,  to 
satisfy,  and  to  control  this  vast  power,  and  to  hold  it 
in  harmony  with  other  authorities,  will  demand  the 
highest  statesmanship.  A  Grovernment  resting  upon 
the  confidence  of  an  enfranchised  people  will  indeed 
be  strong :  but  its  policy  must  be  that  of  the  com- 
munity, which  is  the  source  of  power. 

Whatever  may  be  our  institutions,  public  opinion 
has  become  the  ultimate  ruler  of  our  political  desti- 
nies. However  formed, — ^whether  by  statesmen,  or 
demagogues, — whether  by  society  at  large,  or  by 
the  press, — or  by  all  of  them  combined  — it  domi- 


Irish  C/mrck  Question,  1868.         443 

nates  over  ministers  and  parliaments.  Under  a  more 
restricted  representation,  it  dictated  the  policy  of 
the  state;  and  under  our  present  constitution,  it 
will  exercise  its  influence  more  promptly  and  deci- 
sively. In  public  opinion,  therefore,  rests  at  once 
our  safety,  and  our  danger.  If  rational  and  well 
ordered,  like  the  society  of  this  great  country, 
whose  judgment  it  should  express,  we  may  rely  upon 
it  with  confidence.  If  it  should  become  perverted 
and  degenerate,  who  shall  save  us  from  ourselves  ? 

While  the  discussions  upon  the  later  measures  of 
Parliamentary  inform  were  still  proceeding,  Irish  chnrch 
the  condition  of  Ireland,  its  discontents,  1868. 
and  disaffection,  the  outrages  of  the  Fenians,  and 
the  continued  suspension  of  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act, 
demanded  the  attention  of  Parliament;  and  the 
policy  of  the  Grovemment  in  relation  to  that  country 
was  explained.  Ministers  promised  an  in-  ^g^^  M.axch 
quiry  into  the  relations  of  landlord  and  ^^^^' 
tenant,  proposed  to  create  a  new  Catholic  university 
by  royal  charter,  and  intimated  that  when  the  Com- 
mission already  inquiring  into  the  condition  of  the 
Irish  Church  should  report,  they  might  review  that 
establishment.  Hints  were  also  given  of  promoting 
religious  equality,  by  an  increase  of  the  regium 
donum,  and  by  the  endowment  of  the  Catholic 
clergy,—  a  policy,  as  it  was  described  by  Lord  Mayo, 
of  levelling  upwards,  and  not  downwards.  On  the 
other  side,  Mr.  Grladstone  declared  the  policy  by 
which  he  was  prepared  to  redress  the  grievances  of 
Ireland,  and  to  bring  peace  and  contentment  to  that 
country. 


444        Political  Progress  since  1 860. 

In  1865,  and  again  in  1867,^  Mr.  Gladstone  had 
Irish  disclosed  a  growing  conviction  that  a  re- 

church.  ^^g^  Qf  j^Q  church  establishment  in  Ire- 
land would  soon  be  necessary  ;  and  he  now  announced 
that,  in  his  opinion,  the  time  had  come  when  the 
Protestant  Church,  '  as  a  state  church,  must  cease  to 
exist.'  It  was  in  this  form  that  he  would  secure  re- 
ligious equality  in  Ireland.  He  also  urged  the 
necessity  of  an  early  settlement  of  the  land  question. 

The  disestablishment  of  the  Irish  Church  hence- 
Mr.  Glad-  forth  becamo  the  primary  question  of  the 
lutions.  "  time,  and  was  accepted  by  the  entire  Liberal 
party,  as  its  watchword.  Parliamentary  reform  was 
being  settled  by  the  united  action  of  all  parties : 
but  this  was  a  question  by  which  Conservatives  and 
Liberals  were  again  divided  into  hostile  ranks.  Mr. 
Grladstone  soon  carried  resolutions,  in  opposition  to 
the  Grovernment,  by  which  it  was  sought  to  prevent  the 
creation  of  new  public  interests  in  the  church,  until 
Parliament  had  settled  the  future  position  of  that  es- 
tablishment. Ministers,  defeated  upon  so  momentous 
a  policy,  tendered  their  resignation,  but  obtained  from 
the  Queen  a  power  of  dissolving  Parliament,  whenever 
the  state  of  public  business  would  permit  it.  A  disso- 
May,  1868.  lutiou  at  that  time  would  have  involved  an 
appeal  to  the  old  constituencies,  instead  of  to  the  new 
electoral  bodies,  which  were  to  be  called  into  being  by 
Hissnspen-  ^^  mcasures  still  pending  in  Parliament; 
Bory  biu.  ^^^  eventually  ministers  allowed  the  Sus- 
pensory Bill,  founded  upon  Mr.  Grladstone's  resolutions, 

»  March  28tli,  1865;  May  7th,  1867. 


The  Dissolution  of  I'^^Z.  445 

to  be  passed  through  the  House  of  Commons,  while 
the  reform  bills  were  being  completed  in  view  of  a 
dissolution  in  the  autumn.  The  exceptional  position  of 
ministers  during  this  interval  could  not  fail  to  elicit 
criticism.     They  had  suffered  a  grave  defeat  upon  a 
vital  question  of  state  policy  :  a  measure  which  they 
denounced  was  being  carried  through  the  House  of 
Commons,  in  defiance  of  them :  they  had  advised 
Her  Majesty  not  to  withhold  her  consent  from  the 
Suspensory  Bill,  which  otherwise  could  not  have  been 
passed  by  the  Commons :  they  had  received  authority 
to  appeal  from  the  Commons  to  the  country,  and  yet 
deferred  the  exercise  of  that  authority,  and  continued 
to  hold  office,  and  to  pass  important  measures,  in 
presence  of  a  hostile  majority.      Yet  it  cannot  be 
denied  that  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  the  occa- 
sion naturally  led  to  such  a  position,  on  the  part  of 
ministers.      They  could  not  be  expected  to  resign 
without  an  appeal  to  the  people ;  and  a  sudden  dis- 
solution, while  the  great  measures  of  enfranchise- 
ment were  still  incomplete,  would  have  been  an  idle 
and  mischievous  disturbance  of  the  country,  involv- 
ing a  second  dissolution  a  few  months  later.     The 
Irish   Church   question  had   come  athwart  Parlia- 
mentary reform,  and  was  left  to  await  its  further 
progress.      The  Suspensory  Bill  was  rejected  by  the 
House  of  Lords  :  the  supplementary  mea-  ^^^  dissoiu- 
sures  of  reform  were  completed ;   and  at  ^°"  °^  ^^^^' 
length  an  appeal  was  made  to  the  people.    The  main 
issue  was  the  policy   of   disestablishing   the   Irish 
Church  ;  the  second  was  the  confidence  to  be  reposed, 
by  the  majority  of  the  electors,  in  one  or  other  of 


44^        Political  Progress  since  1:860. 

the  great  political  parties,  whose  policy,  character, 
and  conduct  had  recently  been  displayed  in  the  con- 
tentions of  the  three  last  eventful  years. 

The  result  of  the  elections  was  decisive  of  these 
Its  decisive  issucs.  All  the  Conditions  of  success  were 
results.         ^^  ^j^g  g.^g  ^f  ^^^  Liberal  party.      The 

policy  of  disestablishing  the  Irish  Church  united 
English  Dissenters,  Scottish  Presbyterians,  and  Irish 
Eoman  Catholics  with  Liberal  politicians  of  every 
shade,  who  had  long  regarded  that  institution  as 
theoretically  indefensible.  The  wide  extension  of 
the  suffrage  had  also  increased  their  power.  Many 
Conservatives  had  persuaded  themselves  that  the 
lower  class  of  electors  would  be  on  their  side ;  but 
generally  it  was  found  that  the  sympathies  of  the 
new  constituencies  were  with  the  Liberal  party.* 
There  were,  indeed,  some  remarkable  exceptions, 
Mr.  Grladstone  himself  was  defeated  in  South-West 
Lancashire, — a  new  division  of  that  county  which 
came  within  the  Conservative  influence  of  Liverpool. 
Other  parts  of  that  great  manufacturing  county,  and 
its  boroughs,  also  showed  a  strong  preference  for  Con- 
servative candidates.  On  the  whole,  however,  the 
Liberal  party,  throughout  the  country,  sent  to  Par- 
liament a  majority  of  about  120,  pledged  to  support 
Mr.  Gladstone,  and  to  vote  for  the  disestablishment 
of  the  Irish  Church.  So  decided  and  incontestable 
was  the  national  verdict,  that  Mr.  Disraeli,  without 
5^SS,  waiting  for  the  meeting  of  Parliament, 
1869.  ^^''       placed  in  Her  Majesty's  hands  the  resigna- 

'  In  the  United  Kingdom  1,408,239  electors  voted  for  Liberal  can- 
didates, and  883,530  for  Conservative  candidates,  thus  showing  a 
majority  of  524,709  in  fayour  of  the  former. 


Irish  Church  Act,  1869.  447 

tion   of  ministers ;   and   Mr.   Gladstone   (who   had 
been  returned  for  Greenwich)  was  at  once  Mr.  oiad- 
charged  with  the  formation  of  a  new  ad-  Premier, 
ministration.     It  united  Peelites,  Whigs,  and  ad- 
vanced Liberals  :  it  embraced  Mr.  Bright  and  JNIr. 
Lowe. 

And  now  was  witnessed  the  extraordinary  power 
of  a  Government  representing  the  popular  The  Irish 
will,  under  an  extended  franchise.  Mr.  \'m?  * 
Gladstone  had  committed  himself  to  the  boldest 
measure  of  modern  times.  Thirty  years  before,  the 
House  of  Lords  and  the  Conservative  party  had 
successfully  resisted  the  theoretical  assertion  of  the 
right  of  the  state  to  appropriate  the  surplus  revenues 
of  the  Irish  Church  ;  and  now  it  was  proposed  to 
disestablish  and  disendow  that  church,  and,  after  the 
satisfaction  of  existing  interests,  to  apply  the  bulk 
of  its  revenues  to  secular  purposes.  Founded  upon 
the  principle  of  religious  equality,  it  was  a  masterly 
measure, — thorough  in  its  application  of  that  prin- 
ciple,— and  complete  in  all  its  details.  Given  the 
principle, — which  public  opinion  had  now  fully  ac- 
cepted,— its  legislative  workmanship  was  consum- 
mate. The  church  was  severed  from  the  state,  and  its 
bishops  deprived  of  their  seats  in  Parliament.  At  the 
same  time,  the  aimual  grants  to  Presbyterian  minis- 
ters, in  the  form  of  regium  donum,  and  to  the  Eoman 
Catholic  college  of  Maynooth,  were  commuted. 

This  great  ecclesiastical  measure, — by  far  the 
greatest  since  the  Reformation, — was  supported  by 
arguments  of  rare  ability,  and  by  overwhelming 
majorities.      The  Lords   secured  somewhat   better 


44^       Political  Progress  since  i860. 

terms  for  the  chiirch,  but  all  their  amendments 
which  otherwise  affected  the  principle,  or  main 
conditions  of  the  bill  were  disagreed  to  ;  and  the 
bill,  unchanged  in  every  essential  point,  was  passed 
in  a  single  session. 

When  the  disestablishment  of  the  Church  in 
Irish  Land  Iceland  had  been  accomplished,  Mr.  Grlad- 
Bm,i87o.  gtone  immediately  undertook  to  redress 
another  Irish  grievance.  For  nearly  forty  years  the 
relations  between  landlords  and  tenants  in  Ireland 
had  been  discussed  in  Parliament,  and  especially  the 
system  of  evictions,  and  the  rights  of  tenants  to  com- 
pensation for  unexhausted  improvements.  This  diflS- 
cult  question,  so  nearly  affecting  the  rights  of 
property,  was  grappled  with  by  Mr.  Gladstone  in 
1 870,  and  carried  to  a  successful  conclusion,  like  the 
Irish  Church  bill,  in  the  same  session. 

This  period  also  witnessed  the  settlement  of  an- 
church  other  important  question  affecting  the 
1866-68.  Church,  which  had  been  under  the  con- 
sideration of  Parliament  for  thirty-five  years.  In 
1866,  a  compromise  in  regard  to  church  rates,  first 
suggested  by  Mr.  Waldegrave-Leslie,  had  been  viewed 
favourably  by  Mr.  Grladstone.  It  was  to  abolish  com- 
pulsory church  rates,  and  to  facilitate  the  raising  of 
voluntary  church  rates.  In  1867,  Mr.  Hardcastle 
succeeded  in  passing  a  bill  through  the  Commons 
to  give  effect  to  this  arrangement :  but  it  was  re- 
jected by  the  Lords,  upon  the  second  reading. 

And,  at  length,  in  1868,  Mr.  Grladstone  intro- 
duced a  bill  founded  upon  the  same  principle.  It 
commended  itself  to  dissenters  as   giving  up  the 


University  Tests.  449 

principle  of  compulsion ;  and  to  churchmen  as 
affording  a  legal  recognition  of  voluntary  church 
rates,  and  providing  machinery  for  their  church 
assessment  and  collection.  The  church  had  ^^'^'  ^^^^• 
already  been  practically  reduced  to  a  voluntary 
system  of  church  rates ;  and  this  bill,  if  it  surren- 
dered her  theoretical  claims,  at  least  saved  her  from 
further  litigation  and  obloquy.  It  was  approved  by 
the  Commons,  and  was  even  accepted  by  the  Lords, 
after  consideration  by  a  select  committee,  and  the 
addition  of  several  amendments.  And  thus,  at 
length,  this  long-standing  controversy  between 
churchmen  and  dissenters  was  brought  to  a  close. 
If  the  church  failed  in  securing  all  her  legal  rights, 
the  present  settlement  was  founded  upon  the  prac- 
tical result  of  a  long  contention  in  the  courts  and 
in  Parliament,  and  was  a  compromise  which  all 
parties  were  contented  to  accept. 

Other  questions  affecting  the  interests  of  church- 
men, dissenters,  and  Eoman  Catholics  were  xjniveraity 
also  pressing  for  a  settlement,  at  this  time.  '^^'^' 
Foremost  of  these  was  that  of  religious  tests  at  the 
universities,  by  which  dissenters  were  denied  their 
share  in  the  privileges  and  endowments  of  those 
national  seats  of  learning,  for  which  churchmen  alone 
were  qualified. 

The  injustice  of  this  exclusion  had  been  repeat- 
edly discussed :  but  it  was  not  until  1866  that  the 
entire  Liberal  party  were  determined  to  redress 
it.  In  that  year  a  bill,  introduced  by  Mr.  Coleridge, 
was  passed  by  the  Commons,  and  rejected  by  the 
Lords.     Again,  in  1868,  the  second  reading  of  a  bill 

VOL.  III.  G  G 


450         Political P^'ogress  since  i860. 

witli  tlie  same  objects,  introduced  by  Mr.  Coleridge, 
was  agreed  to  after  full  discussion,  and  by  a  large 
majority :  ^  but  was  prevented,  by  the  pressure  of 
other  measures,  from  being  fm-ther  proceeded  with 
in  that  session. 

In  1869,  a  similar  bill  was  passed  by  the  Commons 
University  ^^^  again  rejected  by  the  Lords.  Again, 
Te^tsBiu,  ij^  ig7Q^  ^]jg  University  Tests  Bill  was 
TSts^Bu?  passed  by  the  Commons ;  and  referred  by 
^^^^'  the  Lords   to  a  select  committee,   whose 

deliberations  deferred  the  bill  to  another  session. 
University  But,  at  length,  in  1871,  the  same  bill, 
3871.  .  '  having  again  been  sent  up  to  the  Lords, 
was  ultimately  agreed  to. 

This  Act,  stating  that  the  benefits  of  these  univer- 
sities '  shall  be  freely  accessible  to  the  nation,' 
enacted  that  persons  taking  lay  academical  degrees, 
or  holding  lay  academical  or  collegiate  offices  in 
the  universities  of  Oxford,  Cambridge,  or  Durham, 
shall  not  be  required  to  subscribe  any  religious  test 
or  formulary.  But  as  it  did  not  open  to  dissenters 
the  headships  of  colleges,  or  professorships  of  divinity, 
or  offices  required  to  be  held  by  persons  in  holy 
orders  or  by  churchmen,  some  dissatisfaction  was 
still  expressed  at  this  settlement.  Otherwise  an- 
other controversy  was,  at  length,  closed;  and  one 
of  the  last  grievances  of  dissenters  redressed. 

Another  religious  controversy  was  also  settled  by 
Ecciesiasti-    Parliament.     The  celebrated  Ecclesiastical 

cal  Titles 

Act,  1871.  Titles  Act  was  an  offence  to  Eoman  Catho- 
lics, while  it  was  wholly  inoperative  as  a  protection 

»  By  198  against  140. 


Education.  451 

against  the  Church  of  Eome.  After  an  inquiry  into 
its  operation  by  a  committee  of  the  House  of  Lords, 
in  1868,  and  discussions  in  both  Houses  concerning 
the  form  in  which  the  law  should  be  expressed, 
rather  than  its  policy,  the  Act  was  eventually  re- 
pealed in  1871,  with  the  general  acquiescence  of  all 
parties.  The  law  and  the  Queen's  prerogative  in 
regard  to  ecclesiastical  titles  and  jurisdiction  were 
again  asserted  by  Parliament,  but  the  original  Act  • 
with  its  penalties,  which  had  never  been  enforced, 
was  removed  from  the  statute  book. 

Of  all  social  questions  none  can  be  compared  in 
importance  with  that  of  the  education  of  Education, 
the  people.  Not  only  is  it  essential  to  their  moral,  in- 
tellectual, and  material  welfare,  but  at  a  time  when 
large  masses  of  the  community  had  recently  been 
invested  with  political  power,  it  was  obviously  the 
duty  of  the  state  to  apply  itself  earnestly  to  the  task 
of  popular  enlightenment ;  and  this  task  was  under- 
taken immediately  after  the  new  scheme  of  repre- 
sentation had  been  completed. 

In  1869,  an  important  measure  was  passed  in  the 
interests  of  education,  for  the  reform  and  regulation 
of  endowed  schools. 

In  the  same  5'ear  a  comprehensive  scheme  for  the 
improvement  of  education  in  Scotland  was  passed  by 
the  Lords;  but  was  unfortunately  lost,  partly  by 
reason  of  amendments  made  to  the  bill  by  the  Com- 
mons, and  partly  in  consequence  of  the  late  periou 
at  which  these  amendments  were  communicated  to 
the  Lords. 

In  England  great  advances  had  been  made,  since 
GG  2 


452         Political  Progress  since  \Z6o. 

1834,  in  popular  education,  aided  by  the  state. 
Elementary  But  as  the  sjfitem  was  entirely  founded 
Act,  1870.  upon  local  and  voluntary  efforts,  it  too  often 
happened  that  the  places  wliich  most  needed  the 
civilising  agency  of  the  schoolmaster  were  left  des- 
titute. All  parties  admitted  the  necessity  of  pro- 
viding more  effectual  means  for  the  general  educa- 
tion of  the  people  ;  but  the  old  *  religious  difficulty ' 
caused  the  widest  divergence  of  opinions  concerning 
the  principles  upon  which  education  should  be  con- 
ducted. The  church  party  naturally  desired  to  re- 
tain the  teaching  of  the  church  catechism,  with  a 
liberal  conscience  clause  for  the  satisfaction  of  dis- 
senters. Another  party,  known  as  Secularists,  advo- 
cated secular  education  only  in  the  schools,  leav- 
ing religious  instruction  to  be  sought  elsewhere. 
Another  party,  again,  insisted  upon  religious  in- 
struction in  the  schools,  while  they  objected  to  the 
church  catechism  and  formularies. 

In  1870,  Mr.  Gladstone's  government  were  pre- 
pared with  a  scheme  for  the  settlement  of  this  great 
social  question.  The  country  was  divided  into  school 
districts  under  the  government  of  elected  school 
boards,  and  provision  was  made  for  fhe  support  of 
schools  out  of  local  rates.  The  voluntary  system, 
which  had  already  accomplished  so  much  good,  was 
retained :  but  a  more  complete  organisation  and  ex- 
tended means  were  provided.  This  wise  and  states- 
manlike measure — which  was  carried  through  the 
House  of  Commons,  with  great  ability,  by  Mr.  Forster, 
— was  nearly  lost  by  the  intractable  dififerences  of 
the  several  parties,  upon  the  religious  question.     It 


The  Ballot.  453 

was  at  length  settled,  however,  upon  the  principle  of 
a  conscience  clause  exempting  every  child  from  any 
religious  instruction  or  observance  to  which  his 
parents  should  object,  and  of  excluding  from  schools, 
provided  by  a  school-board,  every  denominational 
catechism  or  formulary. 

No  measm-e  in  which  religious  jealousies  are  con- 
cerned, can  be  settled  to  the  satisfaction  of  all  parties ; 
and  this  scheme,  accepted  by  the  church  and  by  a 
very  large  proportion  of  nonconformists,  was  natu- 
rally obnoxious  to  the  secular  party.  But  already 
its  general  acceptance  by  all  religious  denominations 
in  the  country,  and  the  earnest  spirit  in  which  it  is 
being  carried  into  effect,  promise  well  for  its  practical 
success. 

The  last  question  of  constitutional  policy  which 
need  be  referred  to,  is  that  of  the  ballot.  TheBaUot. 
This  question  had  long  divided  the  Liberal  party. 
It  had  been  the  distinctive  principle  of  advanced 
Liberals  :  but  had  been  opposed  by  Lord  Palmerston, 
and  by  most  of  his  Whig  followers.  In  1869,  how- 
ever, the  recent  extension  of  the  representative 
system,  disclosures  at  the  late  general  election,  and 
the  altered  relations  of  the  leaders  of  the  Liberal 
party  to  that  section  of  their  followers  who  favoured 
secret  voting,  brought  about  a  change  of  policy  in 
regard  to  that  question.  Ministers  accordingly  pro- 
posed an  inquiry  into  the  mode  of  conducting  Par- 
liamentary and  municipal  elections,  with  a  view  to 
limit  expense,  and  to  restrain  bribery  and  intimida- 
tion ;  and  it  was  generally  understood  that  this 
inquiry  was  designed  to  prepare  the  way  for   tlie 


454         Political  Progress  since  i860. 

general  adhesion  of  ministers  and  the  Liberal  party 
to  the  principle  of  secret  voting. 

This  committee  continued  its  investigations 
throughout  the  session ;  and  being  reappointed,  in 
1870,  presented  a  report,  recommending  several 
changes  in  the  mode  of  conducting  elections,  and 
Ballot  Bill     ^^  adoption  of  secret   voting.     The  go- 

1870.  vernment  introduced  a  bill  founded  upon 
this  report:  but  the  education  bill  and  other  im- 
portant measures  interfered  with  its  further  progress. 
Ministers,  however,  and  the  Liberal  party  now 
stood  committed  to  the  principle  of  the  ballot; 
and  this  most  important  constitutional  question, 
which  for  nearly  forty  years  had  been  discussed 
rather  as  a  political  theory  than  as  a  practical 
measure,  was  accepted  by  a  powerful  Government, 
and  a  large  majority  of  the  House  of  Commons,  as 
the  policy  of  the  state. 

In  1871,  another  bill  was  brought  in  and  passed. 
Ballot  BUI     s-ftsr  protracted  discussions,  by  the  Com- 

1871.  inons  :  but  it  was  received  by  the  Lords  at 
so  late  a  period  of  the  session  that  they  declined  to 
consider  it;  and  this  complement  to  an  extended 
franchise  still  awaits  the  final  judgment  of  Parlia- 
ment. ' 

Such  have  been  the  constitutional  measures  of  the 
Conclusion,  last  ten  years.  In  all,  we  recognise  the 
development  of  those  liberal  principles  which  had 
characterised  the  policy  of  a  previous  generation. 
In  politics,  more  power  has  been  given  to  the 
people  :  in  religion,  more  freedom  and  equality. 

*  The  ballot  was,  at  length,  adopted  in  1872, 


INDEX. 


ABBOT,  Mr.  Speaker,  opposes 
Catholic  relief,  iii.  141,  142  ; 
his  speech  at  the  Bar  of  the 
Lords,  143,  n, 

Abercorn,  Earl  of,  his  rights  as 
peer  of  Great  Britain  and  of 
Scotland,  i.  288 

Abercromby,  Mr.,  his  motion  on 
Scotch  representation,  i.  359 

Abercromby,  Sir  E.,  his  opinion  of 
the  Irish  soldiery,  iii.  326 ;  re- 
tires from  command,  ib. 

Aberdeen,  Earl  of,  the  Eeform 
Bill  of  his  ministry,  i.  452;  his 
ministry,  ii.  217;  its  fall,  218; 
his  efforts  to  reconcile  differences 
in  the  Church  of  Scotland,  iii. 
244,  253 

A'Conrt,  Colonel,  deprived  of  his 
command  for  votes  in  parliament, 
i.  28 

Addington,  Mr.,  mediated  between 
Greorge  III.  and  Pitt  on  the  Ca- 
tholic question,  i.  95 ;  formed  an 
administration,  97  ;  official  diffi- 
culties caused  by  the  King's  ill- 
ness at  this  juncture,  195-199; 
his  relations  -with  the  King,  98  ; 
resigned  office,  99 ;  led  the 
'King's  friends,'  100  ;  took  office 
under  Pitt,  101 ;  made  a  peer, 
ib.;  permitted  debate  on  notice 
of  motion,  402,  to.  Sec  also  Sid- 
mouth,  Viscount 

Additional  Curates  Society,  sums 
expended  by,  iii.  218,  n. 

Addresses  to  the  crown,  from  par- 
liament,  respecting    peace  and 


war,  or  the  dissolution  of  par- 
liament, ii.  86,  90;  and  from 
the  people,  89  ;  Lord  Camden's 
opinion,  90 

Admiralty  Court,  the,  judge  of, 
disqualified  from  sitting  in  par- 
liament, i.  375 

Adullam,  Cave  of, — a  party  so 
named,  1866,  iii.  431 

Advertisement  duty,  first  imposed, 
ii.  245 ;  increased,  327 ;  abolished, 
381 

Affirmations.     See  Quakers 

Agitation,  political.  See  Opinion, 
Liberty  of;  Political  Associa- 
tions ;  Public  Meetings 

Aliens,  protection  of,  iii.  49-56  ; 
Alien  Acts,  50,  52  ;  Traitorous 
Correspondence  Act,  52;  Na- 
poleon's demands  refused,  54  ; 
the  Conspiracy  to  Murder  Bill, 
58  ;  Extradition  Treaties,  59 

Almon,  bookseller,  proceeded 
against,  ii.  252 

Al thorp.  Lord,  the  Melbourne 
ministry  dismissed,  on  his  ele- 
vation to  the  House  of  Lords,  i. 
146 ;  brings  forward  cases  of 
imprisonment  for  debt,  iii.  28  ; 
his  church-rates  measure,  1834, 
203  ;  his  plans  for  tithe  com- 
mutation, 219  ;  commenced  the 
modern  financial  policy,  418 

American  colonies,  the  war  with, 
stopped  by  the  Commons,  i.  66, 
ii.  87  ;  pledge  exacted  by  George 
III.  of  liis  ministers  to  maintain 
the  war,  i.  49;  the  war  with,  a 


456 


Index. 


test  of  party  principles,  ii.  147, 
150  ;  first  proposals  to  tax  them, 
iii.  343  ;  Mr.  Grenville's  Stamp 
Act,  347;  repealed,  349;  Mr. 
Townshend's  scheme,  350 ;  re- 
pealed, except  the  tea  duties, 
351 ;  attack  on  the  tea  ships, 
352  ;  the  port  of  Boston  closed, 
353 ;  the  constitution  of  Massa- 
chusetts superseded,  ih. ;  at- 
tempts at  conciliation,  354  ;  the 
tea  duty  repealed,  355 ;  inde- 
pendence of  colonies  recognised, 
356 ;  its  effect  on  Ireland,  309 

Anne,  Queen,  the  land  revenues  at 
her  accession,  i.  229 ;  their 
alienation  restrained,  ih. ;  her 
civil  list  and  debts,  233 ;  in- 
crease of  peerage,  during  her 
reign,  274  ;  created  twelve  peers 
in  one  day,  ib. ;  holders  of  offices 
disqualified  by  the  Act  of  Settle- 
ment of  her  reign,  370  ;  popular 
addresses  to,  praying  a  dissolu- 
tion, ii.  90 ;  the  press  in  the 
reign  of,  ii.  243  ;  her  bounty  to 
poor  clergy,  iii.  216 

Anti-Corn  Law  League,  the,  ii. 
413-417 

Anti-Slavery  Association,  the,  ii. 
277-404 

Appellate  jurisdiction  of  the  House 
of  Lords  bill,  i.  298 

Appropriation  of  grants  by  parlia- 
ment, the  resolution  against 
issue  of  unappropriated  money, 
i.  76  ;  the  commencement  of  the 
system,  231,  ii.  98;  misappro- 
priation of  grants  by  Charles  U., 
i.  232 

Appropriation  question,  the,  of 
Irish  Church  revenue,  iii.  260- 
268 

Arcot,  Nabob  of,  represented  in 
parliament  by  several  members, 
i.  396 

Army,  the,  duty  of  muster-mas- 
ters, 30,  n. ;  their  abolition  in 
1818,  ib.\  interference  of  mili- 
tary in  absence  of  a  magistrate, 


ii.  276  ;  Orange  lodges  in,  4Q2  ; 
impressment  for,  iii.  20 ;  free- 
dom of  worship  in,  127,  134; 
the  defence  of  colonies,  375 ; 
flogging  in,  abated,  405 

Army  and  Navy  Service  Bill  op- 
posed by  George  IIL,  i.  105  ; 
withdrawn,  107 

Army  and  Navy  Service  Bill,  the, 
iii.  126 

Arrest,  on  mesne  process,  iii.  29  ; 
abolished,  30 

Articles,  the  Thirty-nine,  subscrip- 
tion to,  by  clergy,  and  on  ad- 
mission to  the  universities,  iii. 
78,  91,  198;  by  dissenting 
schoolmasters,  abolished,  93,  94 

Assizes,  the,  a  commission  for 
holding,  issued  during  George 
III.'s  incapacity,  i.  188 

Associations.  ^See  Political  Asso- 
ciations 

Auchterarder  Cases,  the,  iii.  242, 
244 

Australian  colonies,  the  settlement 
and  constitutions  of,  iii.  358, 
370 


BAKER,  Mr.,  his  motion  against 
the  use  of  the  king's  name,  i.  69 

Ballot,  vote  by,  motions  for  adop- 
tion of,  i.  416,  445  ;  one  of  the 
points  of  the  Charter,  ii.  408 ; 
in  the  Colonies,  371 ;  its  adop- 
tion in  England  recommended 
by  a  committee,  1870,  iii.  454  ;  a 
bill  brought  in  for  that  purpose, 
but  dropped,  ih.  ;  another  bill 
passed  by  the  Commons  in  1871, 
but  rejected  by  the  Lords,  ih. 

Baptists,  the  number  and  places  of 
worship  of,  iii.  223,  224  n. 

Baronetaire,  past  and  present  num- 
bers of^i.  323 

Barre,  Colonel,  deprived  of  his 
command  for  votes  in  parlia- 
ment, i.  28  ;  resigned  his  com- 
mission, 47  ;  passed  over  in  a 
brevet,  ih. 


Index. 


457 


BEA 

Beaiifoy,  Mr.,  his  efforts  for  the  ■ 
relief  of  dissenters,  iii.  100-102 

'  Bedchamber  Question,  the,'  i,  155 

Bedford,  Duke  of,  remonstrated 
against  Lord  Bute's  influence,  i. 
32 ;  attacked  by  the  silk-weavers, 
ii.  267 

Berkeley,  Mr.  H.,  his  motions  for 
the  ballot,  i.  447 

Birmingham,  public  meetings  at, 
ii.  3tf2-385  ;  election  of  a  legis- 
latorial attorney,  352  ;  political 
union  of,  384,  386 

Births,  bills  for  registration  of,  iii. 
151,  192 

Bishops,  their  number  in  the  house, 
i.  299  ;  attempts  to  exclude  them, 
300  ;  their  present  position,  302  ; 
their  votes  upon  the  Eeform  Bill, 
309,  310  ;  Irish  representative 
bishops,  281 ;  deprived  of  their 
seats  by  Irish  Church  Act,  iii.  441 

Blandford,  Marquess  of,  his  schemes 
of  reform,  i.  412 

Boards.     See  Local  Government 

Bolingbroke,  Lord,  his  theory  of  *  a 
patriot  king,'  i.  12 

Boroughs,  different  rights  of  elec- 
tion in,  i.  331,  355  ;  number,  &c. 
of  English  nomination  boroughs, 
330,  332 ;  of  Scotch,  355 ;  of  Irish, 
359;  total  number  in  the  represen- 
tation of  the  United  Kingdom, 
361 ;  seats  for,  bought  or  rented, 
335.  343,  345;  advertised  for  sale, 
337;  prices  of,  337,344,  367; 
'  borough-brokers,'  339 ;  law- 
passed  against  the  sale  of 
boroughs,  346 ;  government 
boroughs,  347  ;  changes  effected 
by  the  Eeform  Acts,  1867,  1868, 
iii.  441 

Boston,  Lord,  assaulted,  ii,  273 

Boston,  the  port  of,  closed  by  Act, 
iii.  353 

Bourne,  Mr.  S.,  his  Vestry  Act, 
iii.  277 

Boyer,  an  early  reporter  of  debates 
in  parliament,  ii.  36 

Braiiitree  Cases,  the,  iii.  205 


Brandreth,  execution  of,  ii.  345 

Brand,  Mr,,  his  motion  against  the 
pledge  required  of  the  Grrenville 
ministry,  i.  109 

Bribery  at  elections,  prior  to  par- 
liamentary reform,  i.  333  ;  com- 
menced in  reign  of  Charles  II., 
ib.\  supported  by  George  III., 
341,  344;  acts  to  restrain,  334, 
336,  346 ;  bribery  since  the  Ee- 
form Act,  431 ;  later  bribery 
acts,  435  ;  proof  of  agency,  435  ; 
iifquiry  bycommission,436 ;  gross 
cases,  437  ;  travelling  expenses, 
438  ;  policy  of  legislation,  439, 
iii,  441 

Bribery  of  members  of  parliament. 
See  Members  of  the  House  of 
Commons 

Briellat,  T,,  tried  for  sedition,  ii. 
289 

Bristol,  reform  riots  at,  ii.  387 

Brougham,  Lord,  his  motion  against 
the  influence  of  the  crown,  i.  134  ; 
opinion  on  life  peerages,  294 ; 
advised,  as  chancellor,  the  crea- 
tion of  new  peers,  311 ;  his  mo- 
tion for  reform,  420 ;  on  the  du- 
ration of  parliament,  442  ;  de- 
fends Leigh  Hunt,  ii.  335; 
describes  the  license  of  the 
press,  338,  n. ;  promotes  popular 
education,  377,  iii.  412  ;  his  law 
reforms,  389 

Brownists,  the,  iii.  67 

Buckingham,  Marquess  of,  his  re- 
fusal to  transmit  the  address  of 
the  Irish  parliament  to  the  Prince 
of  Wales,  i.  194 

Bunbury,  Sir  C,  attempts  amend- 
ment of  the  criminal  code,  iii.  395 

Burdett,  Sir  F.,  his  schemes  of  re- 
form, i,  406,  407 ;  committed  for 
contempt,  ii.  60;  resists  the 
warrant,  76;  apprehended  by 
force,  77;  his  actions  for  redress, 
ib. ;  his  Catholic  Eelicf  Bills,  iii. 
155, 162 

Burgage  tenure,  the  franchise,  i.  33 1 

Burghs  (Scotland),  reformed,  iii.  287 


458 


Index, 


Burial,  the,  of  dissenters  with 
Church  of  England  rites,  iii.  188, 
193;  bills  to  enable  dissenters  to 
bury  in  churchyards,  194  ;  per- 
mitted in  Ireland,  ih. 

J3urke,  Mr.,  his  scheme  of  economic 
reform,  i.  52,  239,  258  ;  drew  up 
the  prince's  reply  to  Pitt's  scheme 
of  a  regency,  184 ;  his  proposal 
for  sale  of  the  crown  lands,  254 ; 
for  reduction  of  pension  list,  258 ; 
opposed  parliamentary  reform, 
403  ;  his  ideal  of  representation, 
458 ;  opposed  Wilkes's  expul- 
sion, ii.  11  ;  his  remark  on  the  op- 
position made  to  the  punishment 
of  the  reporters,  41 ;  on  pledges 
to  constituents,  70 ;  the  charac- 
ter of  his  oratory,  115;  separ- 
rates  from  the  '  Whigs,  163 ; 
his  alarm  at  the  French  Kevolu- 
tion,  ih.  286  ;  among  the  first  to 
advocate  Catholic  relief,  iii.  95 ; 
his  opposition  to  relief  of  dis- 
senters, 105,  109 

Bute,  county,  the  franchise  of,  prior 
to  reform,  i.  358 

Bute,  Earl  of,  his  unconstitutional 
instructions  to  George  III.,  i.  11 ; 
aids  his  personal  interference  in 
government,  18 ;  his  rapid  rise, 
21  ;  becomes  premier,  22 ;  ar- 
bitrary conduct,  ih, ;  and  parlia- 
mentary bribery,  378,  379 ;  his 
fall,  25 ;  secret  influence  over  the 
King,  25,  31,  34  ;  retired  from 
court,  27;  driven  from  office,  ii. 
247,  266 


CABINET,  the,  admission  of  a 
judge  to  seat  in,  i.  103;  tem- 
porary tenure  of  the  offices  in, 
by  the  Duke  of  Wellington,  148; 
Minute  of,  1832,  315.  See  also 
Ministers  of  the  Crown 

Cal craft,  Mr.,  deprived  of  office  for 
opposition  to  court  policy,  i.  30 

Cambridge  University,  admission  of 
dissenters  to  degrees  at,  iii.  92, 


198;  the  petition  for  admission 
of  dissenters,  1834,196;  state  of 
feeling  at,  on  Catholic  relief,  in 
1812,  137 
Camden,  Lord,  disapproved  the 
Middlesex  election  proceedings, 
ii.  16,  22;  defended  his  conduct 
in  the  cabinet,  19  ;  opinion  on 
popular  addresses  to  the  crown, 
90  ;  supports  the  right  of  juries  in 
libel  cases,  ii.  257,  262,  263  ;  his 
decisions  condemning  the  prac- 
tice of  general  warrants,  iii.  2- 
8  ;  protects  a  Catholic  lady  by  a 
private  Act  of  Parliament,  96  ; 
opposes  taxation  of  the  American 
colonies  ;  349,  351  ;  a  friend  to 
liberty,  392 

Campbell,  Lord,  his  opinion  on  life 
peerages,  i.  294 ;  his  Act  to  pro- 
tect publishers  in  libel  cases,  ii. 
253 

Canada,  a  crown  colony,  iii.  357  ; 
free  constitution  granted,  t6. ;  the 
insurrection,  and  re-union  of  the 
provinces,  365;  responsible  go- 
vernment in,  366;  establishes  a 
protective  tariff,  369 ;  popular 
franchise  in,  370 

Canning,  Mr.,  his  conduct  regarding 
the  Catholic  question,  i.  95,  112; 
in  office,  112,  136  ;  overtures  to, 
from  the  court,  125  ;  declined  to 
support  Greorge  IV.  against  his 
Queen,  129,  133,  n. ;  character  of 
his  oratory,  118;  his  influence  on 
parties,  ii.  175;  in  office,  189; 
secession  of  Tories  from,  ih.  ; 
supported  by  the  Whigs,  190; 
advocates  Catholic  relief,  189,  iii. 
115,  136,  139,  146;  brought  in 
the  Catholic  Peers'  Bill,  147  ;  his 
death,  ii.  191,  iii.  156 

Capital  punishments,  multiplica- 
tion of,  since  the  Revolution,  iii. 
393 ;  since  restricted  to  murder 
and  treason,  398 

Caricatures,  influence  of,  ii.  265 

Carlton  House,  the  cost  of,  i.  251 

Carmarthen,     Marquess     of,    pro- 


Index. 


459 


CAR 

scribed  for  opposition  to  court 
policy,  i.  54 

Caroline,  Queen  (of  Geoi^e  IV.), 
tlie  proceedings  against  her,  i. 
129 ;  the  Divorce  Bill,  131  ; 
withdrawn,  132;  effect  of  pro- 
ceedings against,  upon  parties,  ii. 
186 

Catholic  Association,  the,  proceed- 
ings of,  ii.  368-375,  iii.  164, 
167 

Catholic  Emancipation  opposed 
by  George  III.,  i.  93,  108;  by 
George  IV.,  136;  the  measure 
carried,  137  ;  a  plea  for  parlia- 
mentary reform,  412.  See  also 
Roman  Catholics 

Castle,  the  government  spy,  iii.  41 

Cato  Street  Conspiracy,  the,  ii.  362; 
discovered  by  spies,  iii.  43 

Cave,  the.    See  Adiillam,  Cave  of 

Cavendish,  Lord  J.,  his  motion  on 
the  American  war,  i.  57 

Cavendish,  Sir  H.,  reported  the 
Commons'  debates  (1768-1774), 
ii.  30,  n 

Censorship  of  the  press,  ii.  239- 
243 

Chalmers,  Dr.,  heads  the  Free  Kirk 
movement,  iii.  240  ;  moved  de- 
position of  the  Strathbogie  pres- 
byteiy,  247 

Chancery,  Court  of,  reformed,  iii. 
388,  389 

Chancellor,  Lord.  See  Great  Seal, 
the 

Charlemont,  Earl  of,  heads  Irish 
volunteers,  iii.  314 ;  opposes 
claims  of  Catholics  to  the  fran- 
chise, 320 

Charles  I.,  alienated  the  crown 
lands,  i.  228 

Charles  II.,  wasted  crown  revenues 
recovered  at  his  accession,  i.  228 ; 
misappropriated  army  grants, 
232  ;  bribery  at  elections,  and 
of  members,  commenced  under, 
333,  376 

Charlotte,  Princess,  question  as  to 
the  guardianship  of,  i.  271 


Charlotte,  Queen  (of  George  III.), 
accepted  the  resolutions  for  a  re- 
gency, 185,  213 

Chartists,  the,  torch-light  meetings, 
ii.  407 ;  the  national  petition,  ib. ; 
meetings  and  riots,  408 ;  pro- 
posed election  of  popular  repre- 
sentatives by,  409  ;  the  meeting 
and  petition  of  1848,  410-413 

Chatham,  Earl  of,  in  office  at  ac- 
cession of  George  III.,  i.  13  ; 
his  retirement,  20 ;  refusal  to 
resume  office,  26,  31  ;  his  de- 
meanour as  a  courtier,  39 ;  formed 
an  administration,  40 ;  endea- 
voured to  break  up  parties,  %}>. ; 
ill  health,  42  ;  retired  from  office, 
43  ;  his  statement  as  to  the  in- 
fluence of  the  crown,  44  ;  re- 
ceives overtures  from  Lord  North, 
47  ;  approved  the  Grenville  Act, 
366 ;  advocated  parliamentary 
reform,  393;  favoured  triennial 
parliaments,  441 ;  his  opposition 
to  the  proceedings  against 
Wilkes,  ii.  4,  16  ;  his  bill  to  re- 
verse the  proceedings,  22 ;  his 
resolution,  1 1 ;  moved  addresses 
to  dissolve  parliament,  22,  23, 
90  'f  condemned  the  King's  an- 
swer to  the  city  address,  21  ; 
strangers  excluded  during  his 
speeches,  ib.,  30 ;  supported 
popular  addresses  to  the  crown, 
90 ;  his  opinion  on  the  exclusive 
rights  of  the  Commons  over  tax- 
ation, 104;  his  position  as  an 
orator,  113,  125;  effect  of  his 
leaving  office  on  parties,  ii.  142;  his 
protest  against  colonial  taxation, 
iii.  348 ;  that  measure  adopted 
by  his  ministry  during  liis  ill- 
ness, 350  ;  his  conciliatory  pro- 
positions, 354  ;  proposed  to  claim 
India  for  the  Crown,  377 

Chippenham  election  petition,  "Wal- 
pole  displaced  from  office  by  vote 
upon,  i,  365 

Church  of  England,  the  relations 
of  the  Chui-ch  to  political  his- 


460 


Index, 


tory,  iii.  60 ;  the  Church  before 
the  Beformation,  ih. ;  the  Eefor- 
mation,  61 ;  under  Queen  Eliza- 
beth, 68  ;  relations  of  the  Ke- 
formed  Church  with  the  State, 
67  ;  Church  policy  from  James 
I.  to  Charles  II.,  71-74;  at- 
tempts at  comprehension,  76,  79; 
the  Church  at  the  Revolution, 
77;  under  William  III.,  ih.\ 
state  of,  at  accession  of  George 
III.,  82;  Wesley  and  Whitefield, 
85  ;  motion  for  relief  from  sub- 
scription to  the  Articles,  91 ; 
surrender  by  the  Church  of  the 
fees  on  dissenters'  marriages, 
&c.,  192  ;  the  Church-rate  ques- 
tion, 201 ;  state  of  Church  to 
end  of  last  centmy,  209 ;  hold 
of  the  Church  over  society,  211 ; 
church  building  and  extension, 
215;  Queen  Anne's  bounty,  216 ; 
ecclesiastical  revenues,  ih. ;  sums 
expended  by  charitable  societies, 
2 1 8, « . ;  tithe  commutation,  218; 
activity  by  the  clergy,  220 ; 
Church  statistics,  223;  relations 
of  the  Church  to  dissent,.  224 ; 
to  Parliament,  226 

Church  in  Ireland,  the  establish- 
ment of,  iii.  70,  71;  state  of,  at 
accession  of  Geo.  III.,  82  ;  at 
the  Union,  255  ;  the  tithes  ques- 
tion, 256,  269  ;  advances  to  the 
clergy,  2«8 ;  Church  reform, 
259  ;  the  Temporalities  Act,  260 ; 
the  appropriation  question,  ih.  ; 
the  Irish  Church  commission, 
263;  the  report,  268;  power 
monopolised  by  churchmen,  302 ; 
Irish  Church  question,  1865- 
1 868 ;  Mr.  Gladstone's  resolutions 
and  suspensory  bill,  1868,  444; 
result  of  the  elections  upon  the 
Irish  Church,  446 ;  the  Irish 
Church  disestablished  and  dis- 
endowed, 1869,  447 

Church  of  Scotland,  the  presby- 
terian  form  of,  iii.,  68 ;  legisla- 
tive origin  of,  69  ;  Church  policy 


from  James  I.  to  Geo.  III.,  74, 
77,  79,  87 ;  motion  for  relief 
from  the  Test  Act,  107 ;  the 
patronage  question,  236-247 ; 
earlier  schisms,  239;  the  Free 
Kirk  secession,  251 

Church  rates,  the  law  of,  iii.  201  ; 
the  question  first  raised,  203 ; 
the  Braintree  cases,  205 ;  number 
of  parishes  refusing  the  rate, 
206  ;  bills  for  abolition  of,  207  ; 
final  settlement  of  the  question, 
1868,  448 

Civil  Disabilities.  See  Dissenters  ; 
J  ews ;  Quakers ;  Roman  Catholics 

Civil  list,  the,  of  the  crown,  i.  232 ; 
settlement  of,  on  accession  of 
Geo.  III.,  234;  charges,  debts, 
and  pensions  thereon,  233-261 ; 
charges  removed  therefrom,  243, 
244 ;  Civil  List  Acts,  of  1782, 242 ; 
of  1816,  244;  regulation  of  the 
civil  list,  242-246;  no  debts 
upon,  during  the  last  three 
reigns,  247.  &ee  also  Pensions 
from  the  Crown 

Gierke,  Sir  P.  J.,  his  Contractors' 
Bill,  i.  388 

Coalition  Ministry,  the,  the  for- 
mation of,  i.  63  ;  coalition  minis- 
tries favoured  by  Geo.  III.,  ii.  143, 
157;  the  Coalition,  1783,  153- 
155;  attempted  coalitionsbetween 
Pitt  and  Fox,  165,  177;  coali- 
tion of  the  Whigs  and  Lord  Sid- 
mouth's  party,  177;  Lord  Aber- 
deen's ministry,  217 

Cobbett,  W.,  trials  of,  for  libel, 
ii.  334;  withdraws  from  Eng- 
land, 349  ;  prosecuted  by  Whig 
government,  379 

Cockburn,  Lord,  his  description  of 
Scotch  elections,  i.  357 

Coke,  Lady  Mary,  admired  by  the 
Duke  of  York,  i.  264 

Coke,  Lord,  an  authority  for  life 
peerages,  i.  293 

Coke,  ]VIr.,  moved  a  resolution  hos- 
tile to  the  Pitt  ministry,  i.  78 

Colliers  and  salters,  in  Scotland, 


Index, 


461 


slavery  of,  iii.  38  ;  emancipated, 
39 

Colonies,  British,  colonists  retain 
the  freedom  of  British  subjects, 
iii.  338  ;  colonial  constitutions, 
339,  356,  360,  366;  democratic 
form  of,  369, 371;  the  sovereignty 
of  England,  340;  colonial  ex- 
penditure, 341,  375  ;  and  com- 
mercial policy,  341,  363,  369; 
taxes  common  to  dependencies, 
342 ;  arguments  touching  im- 
perial taxation,  343  ;  taxation  of 
American  colonies,  347-354 ; 
the  crown  colonies,  356;  colo- 
nial administration,  360 ;  first 
appointment  of  Secretary  of 
State  for,  ih.;  patronage  sur- 
rendered to  the  colonies,  362; 
responsible  government,  366 ; 
conflicting  interests  of  England 
and  colonies,  369  ;  dependencies 
unfitted  for  self-government,  376; 
India,  377 

Commerce,  restrictions  on  Irish,  iii. 
305;  removed,  3 10, 312, 332;Pitt's 
propositions,  320 ;  restrictions 
on  colonial  commerce,  341 ;  the 
protective  system  abandoned, 
363,  415;  the  Canadian  tariflf, 
369 

Commission,  the,  for  opening  par- 
liament during  incapacity  of 
George  III.,  questions  arising 
thereupon,  186,  191,  213;  the 
form  of  such  commission,  213  ; 
his  inability  to  sign  a  commis- 
sion for  prorogation,  207 :  and 
for  holding  assizes,  1 88 

Commissions  to  inquire  into  bri- 
bery at  elections,  436 

Common  Law,  Courts  of,  reformed, 
iii.  389 

Commons,  House  of,  position  of,  at 
accession  of  G-eorge  III.,  i.  329  ; 
instances  of  his  personal  inter- 
ference with,  28,  36,  45,  66, 107 ; 
debate  thereon,  51,  69,  76 ;  re- 
sistance of  the  house  to  Pitt's 
first  ministry,    72;    resolutions 


against  a  dissolution,  74,  ii.  90 ; 
against  the  issue  of  money  unap- 
propriated by  parliament,  i.  70  ; 
against  the  recent  changes  in  the 
ministry,  77  ;  resolutions  to  be 
laid  before  George  III.,  79;  re- 
solution against  interference  by 
the  Lords,  80 ;  comments  on  this 
contest,  83 ;  debates  on  the 
pledge  required  of  the  Grenville 
ministry,  109;  action  of  the 
Commons  as  regards  a  regency, 
171-224  ;  doubts  respecting  the 
issue  of  new  writs  during  George 
III.'s  incapacity,  177  ;  fhe  elec- 
tion of  a  speaker  during  the 
King's  incapacity,  183  ;  the  vote 
to  authorise  the  use  of  the  great 
seal,  186,  213 ;  the  address  on 
the  King's  recovery,  190  ;  the 
relations  between  the  two  houses 
of  Parliament,  304  ;  the  compo- 
sition of  the  house  since  the  Ee- 
volution,  327 ;  its  dependence 
and  corruption,  ih. ;  defects  in 
the  representation,  328  ;  nomina- 
tion boroughs,  330-360 ;  ill-de- 
fined rights  of  election,  331  ; 
number  of  small  boroughs,  332; 
influence  of  peers  in  the  house, 
333,  360;  bribery  at  elections, 
333;  since  reform,  431  ;  at  the 
general  elections  of  1761,  335  ; 
of  1768,  337;  sale  of  boroughs, 
336-346  ;  gross  cases  of  bribery, 
340;  bribery  supported  by 
George  III.,  341,  344;  crown 
and  government  influence  over 
boroughs,  17,  347  ;  revenue  offi- 
cers disfranchised,  348 ;  majo- 
rity of  members  nominated,  361  ; 
trial  of  election  petitions,  362; 
by  committee  of  privileges,  363  ; 
at  the  bar  of  the  house,  364  ;  the 
Grenville  Act,  365  ;  corruption 
of  members,  369-389  ;  by  places 
and  pensions,  369 ;  measures  to 
disqualify  placemen  and  pen- 
sioners, 372  ;  number  of,  in  par- 
liament,  373 ;    judges  disquali- 


462 


Index. 


lied,  375 ;  bribes  to  members, 
376-385  ;  under  Lord  Bute,  378 ; 
the  slicp  at  the  pay-offiee,  379  ; 
apology  for  refusing  a  bribe, 
380  ;  bribes  by  loans  and  lot- 
teries, 382  ;  by  contracts,  387 ; 
parliamentary  corruption  con- 
sidered, 389  ;  the  reform  move- 
ment, 393-431 ;  efforts  to  repeal 
the  Septennial  Act,  441  ;  vote  by 
ballot,  445;  qualification  Acts, 
448 ;  proceedings  at  elections 
improved,  449 ;  later  measures 
of  reform,  450 ;  relation  of  the 
Commons  to  crown,  law,  and 
people,  ii.  1-112;  contests  on 
questions  of  privilege,  1  ;  the 
proceedings  against  Wilkes,  2  ; 
his  expulsion,  5  ;  his  expulsion 
for  libel  on  Lord  Weymouth,  10  ; 
his  re-elections  declared  void, 
13,  14;  Luttrell  seated  by  the 
house,  14;  motions  upon  the 
Middlesex  election  proceedings, 
16  ;  the  house  address  the  King 
condemning  the  city  address,  21 ; 
the  resolution  against  Wilkes 
expunged,  25 ;  exclusion  of 
strangers  from  debates,  27,  51  ; 
the  exclusion  of  ladies,  52,  n. ; 
the  lords  excluded  from  the 
Commons,  32 ;  contest  with  the 
printers,  touching  the  publica- 
tion of  debates  (1771),  33, 
"8 ;  and  with  the  city  authori- 
ties, 43 ;  report  of  debates 
permitted,  49 ;  reporters'  and 
strangers'  galleries,  55 ;  pub- 
lication of  division  lists,  ib.  ; 
strangers  present  at  divisions, 
57  ;  publicity  given  to  committee 
proceedings,  58;  to  parliamen- 
tary papers,  ib. ;  freedom  of 
comment  upon  parliament,  59  ; 
early  petitions  to  parliament, 
60  ;  commencement  of  the  mo- 
dern system  of  petitioning,  63  ; 
debates  on,  restrained,  69; 
pledges  of  members  to  tlieir 
constituents,  70 ;  discontinuance 


of  certain  privileges,  73  ;  to  ser- 
vants, ih.;  of  prisoners  kneeling 
at  the  bar,  74 ;  privilege  and  the 
courts  of  law,  75-83 ;  case  of 
Sir  F.  Burdett,  76;  Stockdale 
and  Howard's  actions,  79  ;  com-  ,^ 
mit  Stockdale  and  his  agents,  1 
81  ;  commit  the  sheriffs,  ib.  ;  ^ 
right  of  the  Commons  to  pub- 
lish papers  affecting  character, 
78  ;  increased  power  of  the  Com- 
mons, 83 ;  the  proceedings  re- 
garding Jewish  disabilities,  84 ; 
control  of  the  Commons  over 
the  government,  85  ;  over  peace 
and  war,  and  over  dissolutions 
of  parliament,  i.  56,  73,  ii.  86 ; 
votes  of  want  of  confidence,  i. 
57,  76,  81,  ii.  90 ;  and  of  confi- 
dence, i.  142,  425,  ii.  91  ;  im- 
peachments, 92;  relations  be- 
tween the  Commons  and  minis- 
ters since  the  Reform  Act,  i.  152, 
ii.  95;  their  control  over  the 
national  expenditure,  i.  229, 
ii.  98;  liberality  to  the  crown, 
ii.  99;  stopping  the  supplies, 
423,  n.,  ii.  102  ;  supplies  de- 
layed, 80,  ii.  102 ;  restraints 
upon  the  liberality  of  the  house, 
ii.  103 ;  exclusive  rights  over 
taxation,  ii.  104;  the  rejection 
by  the  Lords  of  a  money  bill, 
105;  relative  rights  of  the  two 
houses,  108 ;  conduct  of  the 
house  in  debate,  125  ;  increased 
authority  of  the  chair,  128  ;  oath 
of  supremacy  imposed  on  the 
Commons,  iii.  63  ;  O'Connell  re- 
fused his  seat  for  Clare,  174; 
num.ber  of  Catholic  members  in, 
176;  Quakers  and  others  ad- 
mitted on  affirmation,  177;  a 
new  form  of  oath  established 
for  Jews,  187,  w.;  a  resolution 
of  the  House  not  in  force  after  a 
prorogation,  187,  w. ;  refusal  to 
receive  the  petitions  of  the 
American  colonists,  348.  See 
also   Members  of  the  House  of 


Index. 


46; 


Commons ;  Parliament ;  Peti- 
tions 

Commons,  House  of,  Ireland,  the 
composition  of,  iii.  300 ;  con- 
flicts with  the  executive,  307 ; 
claim  to  originate  money  bills, 
ih. ;  bought  over  by  the  govern- 
ment, 314,  317,  330 

Commonwealth,  the  destruction 
of  crown  revenues  under,  i. 
228 

Conservative  Party,  the.  &ee 
Parties 

Constitutional  Information  Society, 
ii.  282 ;  Pitt  and.  other  leading 
statesmen,  members  of,  ih.,  283  ; 
reported  on  by  secret  committee, 
302,  303  ;  trfal  of  members  of, 
for  high  treason,  306 

Constitutional  Association,  the,  ii. 
367 

Contempt  of  court,  imprisonment 
for,  iii.  26 

Contracts  with  Government,  a 
means  of  bribing  members,  i. 
387 ;  contractors  disqualified 
from  sitting  in  parliament,  389 

Conventicle  Act,  the,  iii.  75 

Convention,  National,  of  France, 
correspondence  with,  of  English 
societies,  ii.  283,  329 

Conventions.  See  Delegates,  Po- 
litical Associations 

Conway,  G-eneral,  proscribed  for 
votes  in  parliament,  i.  28,  29  ; 
took  office  under  Lord  Eocking- 
ham,  S3 ;  disclaimed  the  in- 
fluence of  the  *  King's  friends,' 
35  ;  his  motion  condemning  the 
American  war,  56 

Copenhagen  House,  meetings  at, 
ii.  315,  324 

Corn  Bill  (1815),  the,  ii.  341,  iii. 
416 

Corn  laws,  repeal  of,  ii.  212,  413, 
iii.  418 

Cornwallis,  Marquess,  his  policy 
as  Lord-lieutenant  of  Ireland 
regarding  Catholic  relief,  iii. 
]  16,  326:  concerts  the  Union,  327 


Cornwall,  Duchy  of,  the  revenues 
of,  the  inheritance  of  Prince  of 
Wales,  i.  248 ;  their  present 
amount,  ih. 

Cornwall,  Mr.  Speaker,  his  death 
during  Geoi^e  III.'s  incapacity, 
i.  183 

Corporations,  the  passing  of  the 
Corporation  and  Test  Acts,  iii. 
75,  77  ;  extortion  practised  on 
dissenters  under  the  Corpora- 
tion Act,  90  ;  motions  for  repeal 
of  Corporation  and  Test  Acts, 
100-104,  107;  their  repeal,  ii. 
192,  iii.  157  ;  the  consent  of  the 
bishops,  159 ;  the  bill  amended 
in  the  Lords,  160 ;  admission  of 
Catholics    to,    168,    302,     322; 

and    Jews,    182. (England), 

the  ancient  system  of  Corpora- 
tions, 278  ;  lossof  popular  rights, 
279  ;  corporations  from  the  Re- 
volution to  George  III,,  280; 
corporate  abuses,  ih. ;  monopoly 
of  electoral  rights,  280,  282  ; 
corporate  reform,  283 ;  the  bill 
amended  by  the  Lords,  284 ; 
self-government  restored,  285 ; 
the  corporation  of  London  ex- 
cepted from  the  bill,  286. 

(Ireland),  apparent  recognition 
of  popular  rights  in,  94,  290  ; 
exclusion  of  Catholics,  292  ;  the 
first  municipal  reform  Bill,  ih. ; 
opposition  of  the  Lords,  294 ; 
the  municipal  reform  Act,  295. 

(Scotland),  close  system  in, 

288  ;  municipal  abuses,  289  ;  re- 
form, ih. 

Corresponding  societies,  proceed- 
ings of,  ii.  269,  282,  291,  328  ; 
trials  of  members  of,  292,  307 ; 
bill  to  repress,  329 

County  elections,  territorial  in- 
fluence over,  i.  353  ;  expenses  of 
contests  at,  354,  355 

Courier  newspaper,  trial  of,  for 
libel,  ii.  3S1 

Courts  of  law,  the,  and  parliamen- 
tary privilege,  ii.   74-84;  deci- 


464 


Index. 


sions  in  Burdett's  case,  76  ;  in 
the  Stockdale  cases,  79 

Cniwfurd,  Mr.  S.,  his  motion  as  to 
duration  of  parliament,  i.  442    • 

Crewe,  Mr.,  his  Kevenue  Officers' 
Bill,  i.  348 

Cricklade,  bribery  at,  i.  340 ;  dis- 
franchised, ih. 

Criminal  code,  improvement  of, 
iii.  393,  396  ;  counsel  allowed  in 
cases  of  felony,  399;  summary 
jurisdiction  of  magistrates,  404  ; 
the  transportation  question,  400 

Crosby,  Brass,  Lord  Mayor,  pro- 
ceeded against  for  committing 
the  messenger  of  the  house,  ii, 
44,  47 

Crown,  the,  constitutional  position 
of,  since  the  Eevolution,  i.  1  ; 
paramount  authority  of,  2  ; 
sources  of  its  influence,  2-6 ; 
by  government  boroughs,  347  ; 
by  places,  peerages,  and  pen- 
sions, 134,  237,  369  ;  by  bribes, 
376 ;  by  loans  and  lotteries,  382  ; 
by  contracts,  387  ;  measures  for 
the  diminution  of  its  influence, 
by  disqualification  of  placemen, 
&c.,  61,  348,  369,  374,  388 ;  by 
the  powers  of  the  Commons  over 
the  civil  list  expenditure,  229, 
257 ;  and  over  supplies,  ii.  98 ; 
constitutional  relations  between 
the  crown  and  ministers,  i.  6,  14, 
104,  145,  154,  159,  ii.  95;  the 
influence  of  the  crown  over 
the  government  during  Lord 
Bute's  ministry,  i.  22 ;  Mr. 
Grrenville's,  27 ;  Lord  Koeking- 
ham's,  36, 60 ;  Lord  North's,  44  ; 
Lord  Shelburne's,  62  ;  *  the  coa- 
lition ministry,'  65  ;  Mr.  Pitt's, 
87,  90  ;  Mr.  Addington's,  98 ; 
Lord  Grenville's,  103  ;  the  in- 
fluence of  the  crown  during  tho 
r^ency,  119;  during  the  reigns 
of  William  IV.  and  her  Majesty, 
138-16C;  debates  upon  the  in- 
fluence of  the  crown,  35,  51,  69, 
76, 134, 135 ;  violation  of  parlia- 


mentary privileges  by  the  crown, 
28,  36,  45,  54,  66,  76 ;  bribery 
at  elections,  and  of  membei-s 
supported  by  the  crown,  341, 
344,  381 ;  influence  of  the  crown 
exerted  against  its  ministers  at 
elections,  16,  17  ;  in  parliament, 
28,  36,  66,  90,  104,  136  ;  the  atti- 
tude of  parties  a  proof  of  the 
paramount  influence  of  the 
crown,  92,  124 ;  its  influence 
exerted  in  favour  of  reform, 
138,  143  ;  wise  exertion  of  crown 
influence  in  the  present  reign, 
163;  its  general  influence  in- 
creased, 164  ;  parliament  kept  in 
harmony 'by  influence  of  the 
crown,  307 ;  the  prerogatives  of 
the  crown  in  abeyance,  167-224 ; 
the  Eegency  Bills  of  George 
IIL,  168-213;  of  William  IV., 
219;  of  Queen  Victoria,  223  ; 
powers  of  the  crown  exercised 
by  parliament,  181-188,  212, 
215;  the  Koyal  Sign  Manual 
Bill,  216  ;  questions  as  to  the 
rights  of  an  infant  king,  219  ; 
of  a  king's  posthumous  child, 
222  ;  the  ancient  revenues  of  the 
crown,  225;  the  constitutional 
results  of  the  improvidence  of 
kings,  230;  the  parliamentary 
settlement  of  crown  revenues, 
231;  the  civil  list,  232-248; 
private  property  of  the  crown, 
249 ;  provision  for  the  royal 
family,  ih. ;  land  revenues,  248  ; 
•the  pension  list,  256 ;  rights  of 
crown  over  the  Eoyal  Family, 
262 ;  over  grandchildren,  264, 
271 ;  over  royal  marriages,  264  ; 
the  Koyal  Marriage  Act,  ih. ; 
the  question  submitted  to  the 
judges,  266 ;  opinion  of  law 
officers  on  the  marriage  of  Duke 
of  Sussex,  270 ;  the  attempt  to 
limit  the  rights  of  crown  in  the 
creation  of  peers,  275  ;  numerous 
applications  to  the  crown  for 
peerages,  283;  the  advice  of  par- 


Index. 


465 


I 


liament  tendered  to  the  crown 
as  to  peace  and  war,  a  dissolu- 
tion, and  the  conduct  of  ministers, 
56,  73,  ii.  83-91 ;  addressed  by 
the  people  on  the  subject  of  a 
dissolution,  89;  improved  rela- 
tions between  the  crown  and 
Commons,  95-99  ;  the  delay  or 
refusal  of  the  supplies,  i.  80, 
ii.  102  ;  the  recommendation  of 
the  crown  required  to  motions 
for  grant  of  public  money,  103. 
See  also  Ministers  of  the  Crown 

Crown  colonies,  the.     See  Colonies 

Crown  debtors,  position  of,  iii. 
25 

Crown  lands.  See  Eevenues  of  the 
Crown 

Cumberland,  Duke  of,  conducted 
ministerial  negotiations  for  the 
King,  i.  31,  33 ;  protested 
against  resolutions  for  a  regency 
bill,  185  ;  his  name  omitted  from 
the  commission  to  open  parlia- 
ment, 188;  married  Mrs.  Hor- 
ton,  262  ;  {Ernest)  grand  master 
of  the  Orange  Society,  ii.  400  ; 
dissolves  it,  403 

Curwen,  Mr.,  his  Act  to  restrain 
the  sale  of  boroughs,  i.  346 

Cust,  Sir  John,  chosen  speaker,  i. 
18;  altercations  with,  when  in 
the  chair,  ii.  128 

Customs  and  excise  officers  dis- 
franchised, i.  348;  numbers  of, 
349 


DANBY,  Earl,  his  case  cited 
with  reference  to  ministerial 
responsibility,  i.  115 

Daviot  Case,  the,  iii.  245 

Deaths,  Act  for  registration  of,  iii. 
192 

Debates  in  parliament,  the  pub- 
lication of,  prohibited,  ii.  34; 
sanctioned  by  the  Long  Parlia- 
ment, 34 ;  early  publications  of 
debates,  36  ;  abuses  of  reporting, 
37,   38;    the    contest   with  the 


printers,  40  ;  opposed  in  twenty- 
three  divisions,  41  ;  reporting 
permitted,  49 ;  late  instance  of 
complaints  against  persons  tak- 
ing notes,  51  ;  reporting  inter- 
rupted by  the  exclusion  of 
strangers,  i.  82,  n.,  ii.  51  ;  poli- 
tical results  of  reporting,  53  ; 
stni  a  breach  of  privilege,  54 ; 
galleries  for  reporters,  55 ;  free- 
dom of  comment  on  debates,  59  ; 
improved  taste  in  debate,  127  ; 
personalities  of  former  times, 
125 
Debt,  imprisoment  for,  iii.  31 ; 
debtors'  prisons,  32 ;  exertions 
of  the  Thatched  House  Society, 
33  ;  insolvent  debtors,  34 ;  later 
measures  of  relief,  35 
Delegates  of  political  associations, 
the  practice  of,  adopted,  ii.  269, 
328,  388,  400,  408  ;  assembled 
at  Edinburgh,  293  ;  law  against, 
344;  in  Ireland,  368 
Democracy,  associations  promoted 
in  1792,  ii.  279,  281  ;  alarm  ex- 
cited by,  284 ;  proclamation 
against,  287  ;  in  Scotland,  292  ; 
in  the  Colonies,  iii.  370;  dis- 
couraged by  good  government, 
419.  See  also  Party. 
Denman,    Lord,    his    decision    in 

Stockdale  v.  Hansard,  ii.  78 
Dering,  Sir  E.,  expelled  for  pub- 
lishing his  speeches,  ii.  34 
Derby,  Earl  of,  the  reform  bill  of 
his  ministry,  1859,  i.  453;  the 
rejection  of  the  bill,  456 ;   his 
first  ministry  defeated  on  tha 
house  tax,   ii.  102;  his  minis- 
tries, ii.  216,  221,  229,  iii.  433; 
persuades  the  Lords  to  agree  to 
Jewish  relief,  iii.  186;  his  re- 
form bill,  1867,  436 ;  his  resigna- 
tion, 1869,  iii.  1 
Derbyshire    insurrection,    the,   ii. 

345 
D'Este,   Sir  A.,  his  claim  to  the 

dukedom  of  Sussex,  i.  270 
Devonshire,  Duke  of,  disgraced  for 


VOL.  III. 


H  H 


466 


Index. 


opposition  to  the  treaty  with 
France,  i.  23  ;  resigned  his  lord- 
lieutenancy,  ih. 

Diplomatic  relations  with  the 
Papal  Court  Bill,  iii.  230,  n. 

Disraeli,  Mr.,  his  reform  bill,  1859, 
i.  453 ;  his  reform  resolutions, 
1867,  iii.  435 ;  his  reform  bill  in 
the  same  year,  436 ;  how  amended, 
and  its  ultimate  form,  437  ;  suc- 
ceeds Lord  Derby  as  premier, 
440  ;  his  Scotch  reform  bill,  ih. ; 
and  other  supplementary  mea- 
sures of  reform,  441 ;  his  resig- 
nation, 446 

Dissenters,  origin  of  dissent,  iii.  65- 

77  ;  the  penal  code  of  Elizabeth, 
63,  65 ;  dissent  from  James  I. 
to  Chas.  II.,  71-77 ;  attempts 
at  comprehension,  76,  79 ;  Cor- 
poration and  Test  Acts,  75,  77  ; 
conduct  of  dissenters  at  the  Ee- 
volution,  77 ;  the  Toleration  Act, 

78  ;  dissenters  in  reigns  of  Anne 
and  G-eo.  I.  and  II.,  81 ;  the  Oc- 
casional Conformity  Act,  82 ; 
annual  Acts  of  Indemnity,  ih., 
n. ;  their  numbers  at  accession 
of  Geo,  III.,  83,  n. ;  impulse 
given  by  "Wesley  and  Whitefield, 
85 ;  relaxation  of  penal  code 
commenced,  88 ;  general  cha- 
racter of  the  penal  code,  89  ;  ex- 
tortion practised  on  dissenters 
by  the  City  of  London  under 
the  Corporation  Act,  90  ;  debate 
on  subscription  to  the  Articles 
by  dissenters,  91 ;  and  admission 
to  universities,  92  ;  subscription 
by  dissenting  schoolmasters  abo- 
lished, 93,  94  ;  offices  in  Ireland 
thrown  open,  ih. ;  first  motions 
for  repeal  of  the  Corporation  and 
Test  Acts,  ]  00-105  ;  motions  for 
relief  of  Unitarians,  109  ;  and 
of  Quakers,  112;  Lord  Sid- 
mouth's  Dissenting  Ministers' 
Bill,  134;  relief  from  require- 
ments of  the  Toleration  Act, 
136;    the  army    tlirown    open, 


143  ;  bills  for  relief  of  dissenters 
in  respect  of  births,  marriages, 
and  burials,  151,  152,  188-192  ; 
repeal  of  the  Corporation  and 
Test  Acts,  ii.  192,  iii.  157;  dis- 
senters admitted  to  the  Commons 
on  making  an  affirmation,  177  ; 
admitted  to  universities  and  en- 
dowed schools,  195,  200;  the 
London  University,  198 ;  the 
Dissenters'  Chapels  Bill,  199 ; 
final  repeal  of  penal  code,  200  ; 
the  church-rate  question,  201 ; 
progress  of  dissent,  212,  222; 
numbers  of  different  sects,  &c., 
222,  223  ;  in  Scotland,  255,  w., 
in  Ireland,  268 ;  relations  of  the 
Church  and  dissent,  226  ;  and 
of  dissent  to  political  liberty, 
ih. 

Dissolutions  of  Parliament.  See 
Addresses  to  the  Crown ;  Par- 
liament 

Divisions,  instance  of  a  stranger 
counted  in  a  Commons'  division, 
ii.  28 ;  twenty- three  divisions 
on  one  question,  41  ;  the  lists  of, 
published  by  both  houses,  57  ; 
presence  of  strangers  at,  ih. 

Donoughmore,  Lord,  his  motions 
for  Catholic  Relief,  iii.  131, 136, 
138 

Douglas,  Neil,  trial  of,  for  sedition, 
ii.  351 

Dowdeswell,  Mr.,  opposed  the  ex- 
pulsion of  Wilkes,  ii.  11,  18 

Downie,  D.,  trial  of,  for  high  trea- 
son, ii.  304 

Drakard,  J.,  trial  of,  for  libel,  ii. 
336 

'  Droit  le  Eoi,'  the  book  burnt  by 
order  of  the  Lords,  ii.  7 

Droits  of  the  Crown  and  Admiralty, 
the,  vested  in  the  crown  till 
accession  of  "William  IV.,  i.  235, 
245 

Dundas,  Mr.,  his  amendment  to 
Mr.  Dunning's  resolutions,  i.  52 

Dundas,  Mr.,  leader  of  the  Tories 
in  Scotland,  ii.  172 


I 


Index, 


467 


DUN 

Dundas,  Mr.  E.,  his  influence  in 
Scotland,  ii.  181 

Dungannon,  convention  of  volun- 
teers at,  iii.  314 

Dunning,  Mr.,  his  resolutions 
against  the  influence  of  the 
crown,  i.  52 ;  denied  the  right  of 
the  house  to  incapacitate  Wilkes, 
ii.  18 

Dyer,  cudgelled  by  Lord  Mohun 
for  a  libel,  ii.  244 

Dyson,  Mr.,  soubriquet  given  him 
by  the  reporters,  ii.  40 


EAKL  MAKSHAL'S  Office  Act, 
the,  iii.  154 

East  Eetford,  the  disfranchisement 
bill  of,  i.  414 

East  India,  the  Company  allowed 
a  drawback  on  tea  shipped  to 
America,  iii.  352 ;  first  parlia- 
mentary recognition  and  regula- 
tion of,  377;  Mr.  Eox's  India 
Bill,  378 ;  Mr.  Pitt's,  381 ;  the 
Bill  of  1853,  382;  India  trans- 
ferred to  the  crown,  383  ;  sub- 
sequent administration,  ih. 

Eaton,  D.  I.,  trial  of,  for  sedition, 
ii.  302 

Ebrington,  Lord,  his  motions  in 
support  of  the  reform  ministry, 
i.  425,  426 

Ecclesiastical  Commission,  the,  iii. 
217 

Ecclesiastical  Titles  Act,  the,  1851, 
iii.  232  ;  its  repeal,  1871,  451 

Economic  reform,  Mr.  Burke's,  i. 
52,  239,  258 

Edinburgh,  the  defective  repre- 
sentation of,  1. 356 ;  biU  to  amend 
it,  359 

Edinburgh  Eeview,  the  influence 
of,  ii.  181 

Education,  proposals  for  a  national 
system  in  England,  iii.  412  ;  the 
Endowed  Schools  Act,  1869,  451; 
the  Scotch  Education  Bill,  1869, 
ih. ;  the  Elementary  Education 
Act,  1870,  452  ;  in  Ireland,  270, 


413;  address  of  the  House  of 
Lords  on  the  subject,  415;  the 
system  continued,  ih. 

Edwards,  the  government  spy,  iii. 
43 

Edward  II.,  the  revenues  of  his 
crown,  i.  226 

Edward  VI.,  his  sign  manual  af- 
fixed by  a  stamp,  i.  217 

Effingham,  Earl  of,  his  motion 
condemning  the  Commons'  oppo- 
sition to  Mr.  Pitt,  i.  79 

Eldon,  Lord,  the  suspected  adviser 
of  George  III.  against  the  Gren- 
ville  ministry,  1807,  i.  Ill;  at 
first  disliked  by  the  Eegent,  121 ; 
condoled  with  Geoi^o  IV.  on 
the  Catholic  emancipation,  137  ; 
scandalised  when  the  crown  sup- 
ported reform,  140;  chancellor 
to  the  Addington  ministry,  198; 
his  declaration  as  to  George  III.'s 
competency  to  transact  business, 
204  J  obtained  the  royal  assent 
to  bills,  ih. ;  his  interview  with 
the  King,  202  ;  negotiated  Pitt's 
return  to  office,  203 ;  his  con- 
duct impugned,  204;  motions 
to  omit  his  name  from  Council 
of  Eegency,  205  ;  his  opinion  as 
to  the  accession  of  an  infant 
king,  220 ;  his  position  as  a 
statesman,  ii.  119;  retired  from 
office  on  promotion  of  Canning, 
ii.  189  ;  opposes  the  repeal  of 
the  Corporation  and  Test  Acts, 
192,  iii.  160 ;  and  Catholic  relief, 
171  ;  assisted  poor  suitors  to  put 
in  answers,  27 ;  favours  autho- 
rity, 392 ;  resists  amendment  of 
the  penal  code,  397 

Election  petitions,  the  trial  of 
prior  to  the  Grenville  Act,  i. 
362  ;  under  that  Act,  365  ;  later 
election  petition  Acts,  367 ; 
their  transfer  to  judges  of  supe- 
rior courts,  369,  n. ;  iii.  441 

Elections,  expensive  contests  at, 
i.  333,  338,  354;  vexatious  con- 
tests, 350  ;  Acts  to  amend  elec- 


H  H  2 


468 


Index. 


tion  proceedings,  449  ;  ■writs  for, 
addressed  to  returning  ofl&cers, 
450.  See  also  Eeform  of  Parlia- 
ment 

Elective  franchise,  Ireland,  the 
regulation  of,  iii.  155,  172;  ad- 
mission of  Catholics  to,  168, 
335 

Elizabeth,  Queen,  her  church  po- 
licy, iii.  63 

Ellenborough,  Lord,  his  admission 
to  the  cabinet,  when  Lord  Chief 
Justice,  i.  103  ;  his  conduct  on 
the  trials  of  Hone,  ii.  350, 
n. ;  a  cabinet  minister,  iii.  392  ; 
resists  amendment  of  the  crimi- 
nal code,  397 

Entinck,  Mr.,  his  papers  seized 
under  a  general  warrant,  iii.  7  ; 
brings  an  action,  ih. 

Erskine,  Lord,  his  motions  against 
a  dissolution,  i.  70,  74;  his 
speech  on  the  pledge  required 
from  the  G-renville  ministry, 
113  ;  his  support  of  reform, 
402,  404,  407 ;  the  character  of 
his  oratory,  117;  a  leading  mem- 
ber of  the  Whig  party,  ii.  161 ; 
supports  the  rights  of  juries  in 
libel  cases,  258  ;  case  of  Dean 
of  St.  Asaph,  ih. ;  of  Stockdale, 
259  ;  promotes  the  libel  Act, 
260,  263 ;  defends  Paine,  280  ; 
and  Hardy  and  Home  Tooke, 
307 

Erskine,  E.,  seceded  from  the 
Church  of  Scotland,  iii.  239 

Erskine,  Mr.  H.,  the  leader  of  the 
Whigs  in  Scotland,  ii.  172 

Establishment  Bill,  the,  brought 
in  by  Burke,  i.  241 

Ewart,  Mr.,  his  efforts  to  reform 
the  criminal  code,  iii.  398 

Exchequer  chamber,  court  of,  re- 
verse the  decision  in  Howard  v. 
Gosset,  ii.  82 

Excise  Bill,  its  withdrawal  in  de- 
ference to  popular  clamour,  ii. 
266 

Ex-oflficio  information  filed  by  go- 


vernment for  libels,  ii.  248,  336; 
378*  bills  to  restrain,  251,  255 

Expenditure,  national,  vast  in- 
crease in,  since  1850,  iii.  420 

Extradition  treaties,  iii.  59 


FACTOEIES,  labour  of  children, 
&c.,  regulated  in,  iii.  411 

Families,  great,  the  state  influence 
of,  i.  8,  353  ;  opposed  by  George 
in.,  11,  40;  their  influence  at 
the  present  day,  165 

Financial  pohcy,  the  present  sys- 
tem of,  iii.  418 

Fitzgerald,  Mr.  V.,  defeated  in  the 
Clare  election,  iii.  163 

Fitzherbert,  Mr.,  proscribed  for 
opposition  to  court  policy,  i.  29 

Fitzherbert,  Mrs.,  married  the 
Prince  of  Wales,  i.  269 

FitzwiUiam,  Earl,  dismissed  from 
his  lord-lieutenancy  for  attend- 
ing a  public  meeting,  ii.  356  ; 
his  conduct  as  Lord-lieutenant 
of  Ireland,  iii.  114,  324;  his 
motion  on  the  state  of  Ireland, 
136 

Five  Mile  Act,  the,  iii.  75 

Flogging,  articles  on  military  flog- 
ging punished  as  libels,  iii.  335  ; 
in  army  and  navy  abated,  405 

Flood,  IVIr.,  his  reform  bill,  i.  401  ; 
his  efforts  for  independence  of 
Ireland,  iii.  315 ;  for  reform, 
319 

Foreigners.     See  Aliens 

Four  and  a  half  per  cent,  duties,, 
the,  sources  of  the  revenue  to 
crown,  i.  235,  245 ;  charged  with 
pensions,  257;  surrendered  by 
William  IV.,  261 

Fox,  Mr.  C.  J.,  his  remarks  on  the 
policy  of  George  III.,  i.  49,  51, 
55,  60 ;  coalesced  with  Lord' 
North,  63  :  in  the  coalition 
ministry,  65 ;  brought  in  the 
India  Bill,  67  ;  dismissed  from 
office,  71 ;  heads  the  opposition 
to  Pitt,  74  ;  his  name  struck  off 


liidex. 


469 


the  list  of  privy  councillors  by 
the  King,  89;  and  proscribed 
from  office,  100;  admitted  to 
office,  103 ;  again  dismissed, 
108;  his  death  loosened  the  tie 
between  the  Eegent  and  the 
Whigs,  120;  his  conduct  re- 
garding the  Eegeney  Bill,  177, 
181;  comments  thereon,  193; 
his  disapproval  of  the  Eoyal 
Marriage  Act,  265;  the  West- 
minster election,  351 ;  cost  of 
the  scrutiny,  352  ;  received  un- 
fair treatment  from  Mr.  Pitt, 
ih. ;  denounced  parliamentary 
corruption  by  loans,  385 ;  sup- 
ported the  proceedings  against 
Wilkes,  ii.  26 ;  his  wise  remark 
on  unrestrained  reporting,  51 ; 
his  position  as  an  orator,  114; 
opposes  the  repressive  policy  of 
1792,  ii.  165,  288 ;  and  of  1794-6, 
149,  320-327,  iii.  12 ;  his  ad- 
vice to  the  Whigs  to  take  office 
rejected,  ii.  150 ;  refuses  office 
under  Lord  Shelburne,  151 ;  in 
office  with  liord  North,  153  ;  his 
policy  contrasted  with  Mr.  Pitt's, 
ih.y  n.,  159;  sympathises,  with 
the  French  Kevolution,  163  ;  at- 
tempted coalitions  with  Mr.  Pitt, 
165,  176  ;  deserted  by  his  party, 
166  ;  secedes  from  Parliament, 
173 ;  in  office  with  Lord  Sid- 
mouth,  177,  iii.  125;  effect  of 
his  death  on  parties,  ii.  178  ;  his 
remark  on  the  rights  of  juries  in 
libel  cases,  256  ;  his  libel  bills, 
260 ;  tiikes  the  chair  at  a  reform 
meeting,  1779,  269 ;  advocates 
the  relief  of  Catholics,  iii.  95, 
122 ;  and  of  Dissenters  and 
Unitarians,  103,  104,  108;  his 
India  Bill,  378 

Fox,  Mr.  Henry,  Sir  K.  Walpole's 
agent  in  bribery,  i.  378 

Fox  Maule,  Mr.,  presents  petition 
of  the  General  Assembly,  iii.  250 

France,  the  treaty  of  peace  with, 
proscription  of  the  Whigs   for 


disapproval  of,  i.  23 ;  members 
bribed  to  support,  379 

Franchise,  the,  of  England,  at  the 
accession  of  George  III.,  i.  331  ; 

— '—  of  Scotland,  355  ;  of 

Ireland,  359;  under  the  Eeform 
Act,  427-430  ;  later  measures  of 
reform,  450  ;  the  fancy  fran- 
chises of  the  Whigs,  451 ;  of  the 
Tories,  454  ;  franchises  proposed 
in  1866,  iii.  435;  granted  in 
1867-68,  437-440.  See  also  Ee- 
form in  Parliament 

Free  Church  of  Scotland,  the,  iii. 
252 

Freedom  of  opinion.  See  Opinion, 
Freedom  of 

Free  trade,  the  policy  of,  adopted, 
ii.  210,  416,  iii.  412  ;  effect  of, 
on  colonial  policy,  363 

French  Eevolution,  effect  of,  on 
parties,  ii.  163  ;  sympathy  with, 
of  English  democrats,  279,  281, 
283;  alarm  excited  by,  284, 
360,  365 

'  Friends  of  the  People,'  the  so- 
ciety of,  statements  by,  as  to 
the  composition  of  the  House 
of  Commons,  i.  332,  361  ;  lead- 
ing Whigs  members  of,  ii.  64 ; 
discountenances  democracy,  283 

Frost,  J.,  tried  for  sedition,  ii.  289 

Fuller,  IVIr.  E.,  bribed  by  a  pension 
from  the  crown,  i.  371 


GASCOYNE,  General,  his  anti- 
•  reform  motion,  i.  423 

Gatton,  the  number  of  voters  iu, 
prior  to  reform,  i.  332  ;  the  price 
of  the  borough,  367 

Gazetteer,  the,  complained  against 
for  publishing  debates,  ii.  39 

General  Assembly,  the  (Church  of 
Scotland),  petitions  for  relief 
from  the  Test  Act,  iii.  107; 
passes  the  Veto  Act,  240  ;  re- 
jects Lord  Aberdeen's  compro- 
mise, 244 ;  addresses  Her  Ma- 
jesty,  248 ;    admits  the  quoad 


470 


Index. 


sacra  ministers,  249 ;   petitions 
Parliament,  250  ;  the  secession, 
251  ;  the  Veto  Act  rescinded,  252 
General    warrants,   issued  in  the 
case  of  the  '  North  Briton,'  iii.  2 ; 
against  Mr.  Entinck,  7  ;  actions 
brought  in  consequence,  4  ;  con- 
demned in  Parliament,  9 
Grentleman's  Magazine,    the,    one 
of  the  first  to  report  parliamen- 
tary debates,  ii.  36 
George  I.,  his  cival   list,  i.   233; 
the  powers  he  claimed  over  his 
grandchildren,   264  ;    consented 
to  the  Peerage  Bill,  275 
George  II.,   his   Eegency  Act,   i. 
168;    his   civil  list,    233;    the 
great  seal  affixed  to  two  com- 
missions during  his  illness,  186  ; 
his  savings,  236 
George  III.,  the  accession  of,  i.  9  ; 
his  education,  10 ;  determination 
to  govern,    11-17;  his  jealousy 
of  the  "Whig  families,  11;    his 
secret  counsellors,  12  ;  his  arbi- 
trary conduct  and  violation  of 
parliamentary  privileges  during 
Lord  Bute's  ministry,  22  ;  during 
Mr.  Grenville's,    28;  his  differ- 
ences with  that  ministry,  27,  31, 
33 ;    his   active   interference  in 
affairs  during  that  ministry,  31 ; 
pledged  himself  not  to  be  influ- 
enced by  Lord  Bute,  ib. ;  con- 
sented to  dismiss  Mr.  S.   Mac- 
kenzie, 32  ;  the  conditions  of  the 
Eockingham   ministry,    34;  ex- 
erted his  influence  against  them, 
36,  39  ;  attempted,  with   Chat- 
ham, to  destroy  parties,  40  ;  his 
influence  during  Chatham's  mi- 
nistry, 41,   43;   tried  to   retain 
him   in   office,    43;    the    king's 
ascendency  during  Lord  North's 
ministry,  44,  49,  58 ;  his  irrita- 
tion at  opposition,  45,  48;   ex- 
erted his  will  in   favour  of  the 
Eoyal  Marriage  Bill,  45  ;   took 
notice  of  proceedings  in  parlia- 
ment, 46  ;  proscribed  officers  in 


opposition,  47  ;  exacted  a  pledge 
of  his  ministers  to  maintain  the 
American  war,  49  ;  his  overtures 
to  the  Whigs,  49,   50;  debates 
on  his  personal  interference  in 
parliament,   51-55,  69 ;    sought 
to    intimidate    the     opposition 
peers,    54 ;    the    defeat    of    his 
American  policy,    56 ;    his    ap- 
proval of  Lord  North's  conduct, 
58 ;    the  results   of  the   king's 
policy,  59 ;  the  second  Eocking- 
ham ministry,    60 ;   their   mea- 
sures  to  repress   his  influence, 
61,  258,  349,   373  ;  Lord  Shel- 
burne's  ministry,  62  ;  the  king's 
resistance  to  the  'coalition,'  66- 
70 ;  his  negotiations  with  Pitt, 
63,  64 ;  use  of  his  name  against 
the  India  Bill,  67 ;  his  support 
of  Pitt  against  the  Commons, 
78-82;  his  position  during  this 
contest,  83 ;  its  result  upon  his 
policy,    87 ;   his   relations   with 
Pitt,  ih.',    his  general  influence 
augmented,  89,  92 ;  prepared  to 
use    it    against    Pitt,   90 ;    the 
king's  opposition  to  the  Catholic 
question,  93 ;    his   illness   from 
agitation  on  this  subject,  98  ;  his 
relations  with    Addington,    96, 
98;    Pitt    reinstated,    99;    the 
king's  refusal  to  admit  Fox  to 
office,    100 ;    the    admission   of 
Lord  Grenville  and  Mr.  Pox  to 
office,    103;    his    opposition   to 
changes  in  army  administration, 
104;  iin constitutional  use  of  his 
influence  against  the  Army  and 
Navy    Service    Bill,    105 ;     the 
pledge  he  required  of  his  minis- 
ters, 107;  his  anti-Catholic  ap- 
peal on  the  dissolution  (1807), 
116  ;  his  influence  prior   to  his 
last  illness,  117;    his  character 
compared  to  that  of  the  Prince 
Eegent,     119;     the    king's    ill- 
nesses, 167-216 ;   the   first   ill- 
ness,   167  ;    his    scheme   for  a 
regency,   109;  modified  by  mi- 


Index. 


471 


nisters,    170 ;    speech    and    ad- 
dresses   on    this   subject,    170; 
consented  to  the  withdrawal  of 
his  mother's  name  from  Eegency 
Bill,    173;    his   second    illness, 
175;  recovery,   189;  anxiety  to 
provide  for  a  regency,  195  ;  his 
third    illness,   in    the    interval 
between  the  Pitt  and  Addington 
ministries,   ih. ;   recovery,    197 ; 
fourth    illness,    199 ;    questions 
arising   as    to   his    competency 
to  transact  business,   201-206 ; 
gave  his  assent  to  bills,   202 ; 
anecdote  as  to  his  reading  the 
bills,     202  ;     Pitt's    interview 
with   the   king,    203 ;    his    last 
illness,    206;    the   passing    the 
Eegency  Bill,  208-213  ;  his  civil 
list,  234 ;    other   sources  of  his 
revenue,  235 ;    the  purchase  of 
Buckingham    House,   236 ;    his 
domestic  economy,  ih. ;  debts  on 
his  civil  list,  237  ;  profusion  in 
his  household,  240 ;  his  message 
on  the  public  expenditure,  241  ; 
his  pension  list,  257 ;  his  annoy- 
ance at  his  brothers'  marriages, 
262  ;  his  attachment  to  Lady  S. 
Lennox,  263  ;   the  Eoyal  Mar- 
riage   Act,    264;     claimed    the 
guardianship  of  Princess  Char- 
lotte, 271 ;  profuse  in  creation  of 
peers,  277 ;    his  expenditure  at 
elections,  342;  supported  bribery 
at  elections,   and  of  members, 
341,  344,  381 ;  his  opposition  to 
reform,  91,  399;  his  answer  to 
the  city  address  on  the  proceed- 
ings against  Wilkes,  ii.  20  ;  his 
objection  to  political  agitation  by 
petitions,  ^b ;   his  party  tactics 
on  accession,  ii.  142  ;  influence 
of  his  friends,  143  ;  overcomes 
the   Coalition.    155;    influenced 
by  Lord  Thurlow,  160;  his  re- 
piignance   to    the   Whigs,    161, 
178  ;  to  Pox,  176  ;    directs  the 
suppression  of  the  Gordon  riots, 
275;    his   speech   and  message 


respecting  seditious  practices 
1792  and  1794,  287,  302;  at- 
tacked by  the  mob,  316 ;  opposes 
Catholic  relief,  iii.  117,  118; 
and  the  Army  and  Navy  Service 
Bill,  128 ;  his  message  to  Par- 
liament touching  affairs  in  Ire- 
land, 316 ;  seeks  to  tax  the 
American  colonies,  344,  347 
George  IV.,  the  ascendency  of  the 
Tory  party  under,  i.  129;  tho 
proceedings  against  his  Queen, 
Ih. ;  his  aversion  to  Lord  Grey 
and  the  Whigs,  133  ;  his  popu- 
larity, 134 ;  his  opposition  to 
Catholic  claims,  136;  yielded, 
but  showed  his  dislike  to  his 
ministers,  137  ;  the  Act  to  autho- 
rise him  to  affix  his  sign  manual 
by  a  stamp,  216  ;  his  civil  list 
and  other  revenues,  244,  245  ;  his 
conduct  on  the  passing  of  the 
Catholic  Belief  Bill,  iii.  168, 
172 
Germaine,  Lord  G.,  his  statement 
respecting  George  III.'s  personal 
influence,  i.  49 
German  Legion,  the,  Cobbett's  libel 

on,  ii.  335 
Gerrald,  J.,  tried  for  sedition,  ii. 

298 
Gibson,  Mr.  Milner,  heads  move- 
ment   against   taxes  on   know- 
ledge, ii.  382 ;    his  proposal  to 
establish  county  financial  boards, 
iii.  297 
Gillray,  his  caricatures,  ii.  265 
Gladstone,    Mr.,    separates    from 
Lord  Palmerston's  ministry,  ii. 
219;    his    financial  policy,    iii. 
418;   rejected  by   Oxford  Uni- 
versity, 1865,  429;  introduces  a 
reform  bill,  18G6,  431  ;  becomes 
premier  in  1868,  447;  his  Irish 
Church    Bill,     1869,    ih.  ;     his 
Irish  Land  Bill,  448  ;  and  other 
measures,  449  ct  seq. 
Glasgow,  the  defective  representa- 
tion of,  i.  356 
Gloucester,  bribery  at,  i.  437 


472 


Index. 


GLO 


Gloucester,  Duke  of,  married  Lady 
'  AValdegrave,  i.  262 

Goderich,  Lord,  his  administration, 
ii.  191 

Goldsmiths'  Hall  Association,  the, 
ii.  293,  298 

Good  Hope,  Capo  of,  a  constitution 
granted  to,  iii.  372 

Gordon,  Lord  G.,  the  petitions 
that  he  presented  to  Parliament, 
ii.  64  ;  heads  the  Protestant  As- 
sociation, ii.  272,  iii.  98  ;  pre- 
sents their  petition,  ii.  273 ; 
committed  to  Newgate,  276 

Gosset,  Sir  W.,  sued  by  Howard 
for  trespass,  ii.  82 

Government,  executive,  control  of 
Parliament  over,  ii.  85 ;  strong 
and  weak  governments  since  the 
Eeform  Act,  95.  Sec  also  Minis- 
ters of  the  Crown 

Gower,  Earl  of,  his  amendment  to 
resolutions  for  a  regency,  i.  212  ; 
cleared  the  house,  ii.  31 

Gower,  Lord  F.  L.,  his  resolution 
for  the  state  endowment  of  Irish 
priests,  iii.  156 

Grafton,  Duke  of,  dismissed  from 
lord-lieutenancy  for  opposing 
the  court  policy,  i.  23 ;  accepted 
office  under  Lord  Chatham,  40  ; 
complained  of  the  had  results  of 
Chatham's  ill-health,  42 ;  con- 
sequent weakness  of  the  minis- 
try, 43  ;  his  resignation,  ib. ;  his 
ministry  broken  up  by  debates 
upon  Wilkes,  ii.  18 

Graham,  Sir  J.,  separates  from 
Lord  Palmerston's  ministry,  ii. 
219  ;  case  of  opening  letters  by, 
iii.  46  ;  his  answer  to  the  claim, 
&c.,  of  the  Church  of  Scotland, 
248 

Grampound,  the  disfranchisement 
bills  of,  i.  409 

Grant,  Mr.  E.,  his  motions  for 
Jewish  relief,  iii.  198,  181 

G-rattan,  Mr.,  the  character  of  his 
oratory,  ii.  118  ;  advocates  Catho- 
lic relief,  iii.  123,  131,  136-141 ; 


the  independence  of  L'eland,  313, 
315,  332  ;  his  death,  145 

Great  seal,  the,  use  of,  under  autho- 
rity of  parliament,  during  George 
in.'s  iUness,  i.  182,  186,  209  ; 
questions  arisingthereupon,  191 ; 
aflSxed  by  Lord  Hardwicke  to 
two  commissions  during  illness 
of  George  IL,  186 

Grenville  Act,  trial  of  election  pe- 
titions under,  i.  365 ;  made  per- 
petual, 366 

Grenville,  Lord,  the  proposal  that 
he  should  take  office  with  Pitt,  i. 
100  ;  formed  an  administration 
on  his- death,  103  ;  differed  with 
the  King  on  the  army  adminis- 
tration, 104;  the  Army  Service 
Bill,  105;  cabinet  minute  reserv- 
ing liberty  of  action  on  the  Ca- 
tholic question,  107;  pledge  re- 
quired by  the  King  on  that  sub- 
ject, 108;  dismissed,  ib. ;  his 
advice  neglected  by  the  Regent, 
121 ;  attempted  reconciliation, 
122 ;  failure  of  negotiations  on 
the  'household  question,'  126; 
his  difficulty  in  issuing  public 
money  during  George  III.'s  inca- 
pacity, 214 ;  the  tactics  of  his 
party,  ii.  176, 186 ;  in  office,  176, 
iii.  125 ;  introduces  the  Treason- 
able Practices  Bill,  ii.  317;  ad- 
vocates Catholic  relief,  iii.  120; 
his  Army  and  Navj'  Service 
Bill,  126;  fall  of  his  ministry, 
128 

Grenville,  Mr.  George,  succeeded 
Lord  Bute  as  premier,  i.  25  ;  did 
not  defer  to  Geoi^e  III.,  26  ; 
remonstrated  against  Lord  Bute's 
influence,  ib.,  31 ;  supported  the 
king's  arbitrary  measiires,  28 ; 
differences  between  them,  31 ; 
his  Election  Petitions  Act,  365  ; 
his  statement  of  amount  of  secret 
service  money ;  379 ;  the  bribery 
under  his  ministry,  380;  opposed 
Wilkes's  expulsion,  ii.  12 ;  his 
motion    for    reduction  of   land 


Index, 


473 


tax,  101  ;  attacked  by  Wilkes, 
ii.  103 ;  his  schemes  for  taxation 
of  American  colonies,  iii.  347. 

Orey,  Earl,  his  advice  neglected  by 
the  Kegent,  i.  121 ;  declined 
ofi&ce  on  the  'household question,' 
126  ;  advocated  reform,  and  led 
the  reform  ministry,  139,  310, 
402,  407,  420 ;  lost  the  confi- 
dence of  William  IV.,  145 ;  ac- 
cused Lord  Eldon  of  using  George 
III.'  s  aame  without  due  authority, 
201,  205;  the  regulation  of  the 
civil  list  by  his  ministry,  246  ; 
his  views  on  the  present  state  of 
the  House  of  Lords,  308,  n. ;  ad- 
vised the  creation  of  new  peers, 
311,  315;  favoured  a  shorter 
duration  of  parliament,  441 ;  the 
character  of  his  oratory,  ii.  119; 
the  separation  of  his  party  from 
the  Kadicals,  ii.  182,  199;  car- 
ries Parliamentary  Eeform,  196  ; 
his  ministry,  198-204;  his  Army 
and  Navy  Service  Bill,  iii.  127  ; 
advocates  Catholic  claims,  130; 
and  relief  from  declaration 
against  tran  substantiation,  144 

Grey,  Mr.  (1667),  an  early  reporter 
of  the  debates,  ii.  35 

Grosvenor,  General,  his  hostile  mo- 
tion against  Mr.  Pitt's  ministry, 
i.  78 

Grote,  Mr.,  advocated  vote  by  bal- 
lot, i.  446 


HABEAS  CORPUS  SUSPEN- 
SION ACTS,  the,— of  1774, 
ii.  302,  313,  iii.  12;  of  1817, 
ii.  343,  iii.  16;  of  1860  and 
1871,  19  ;  cases  of,  between  the 
Eevolution  and  1794,  iii.  11 ;  the 

Acts  of  Indemnity,  12-19; 

in  Ireland,  19,  147 
Halifax,  Earl  of,  issue  of  general 
warrants  by,  iii.  2,  7  ;  action 
brought  against  him  by  Wilkes, 
6 ;  obtained  the  consent  of 
George     III.    to    exclude     his 


mother    from   the  Kegency,    i. 
173 

Hamilton,  Duke  of,  a  Scottish  peer, 
not  allowed  the  rights  of  an  Eng- 
lish peer,  i.  286 

Hamilton,  Lord  A.,  advocated  re- 
form in  the  representation  of 
Scotland,  i.  358 

Hanover,  House  of,  the  character 
of  the  first  two  kings  of,  favour- 
able to  constitutional  govern- 
ment, i.  76 

Hanover,  kingdom  of,  the  revenues 
attached  to  the  crown  till  her 
Majesty's  accession,  247 

Hansard,  Messrs.,  sued  by  Stock- 
dale  for  libel,  ii.  78 

Harcourt,  Lord,  supported  the  in- 
fluence of  the  crown  over  parlia- 
ment,* i.  37 

Hardwicke,  Lord,  aflBxed  the  great 
seal  to  commissions  during  ill- 
ness of  George  II.,  i.  186 

Hardwicke,  Lord,  changes  caused 
by  his  Marriage  Act,  iii.  161 

Hardy,  T.,  tried  for  treason,  ii. 
307 

Harrowby,  Earl  of,  supported 
George  IV.  on  the  Catholic  ques- 
tion, i.  114 

Hastings,  Mr.  Warren,  impeach- 
ments not  abated  by  dissolution, 
established  in  his  case,  ii.  93 

Hastings,  the  sale  of  the  seat  for 
this  borough,  i.  346 

Hawkesbury,  Lord,  the  supposed 
adviser  of  George  III.  against 
the  Grenville  ministry,  i.  Ill; 
his  declaration  as  to  the  King's 
competency  to  transact  business, 
201 ;  his  refusal  of  Napoleon's 
demands  against  the  press  and 
foreigners,  ii.  332,  iii.  54 

Heberden,  Dr.,  his  evidence  re- 
garding the  King's  illnesses,  i, 
204,  205 

Henley,  Mr.,  seceded  from  the 
Derby  ministry  on  the  question 
of  reform,  i.  455 

Henry  III.,  V.,  VI.,  and  VII.,  the 


474 


Index. 


revenues  of  their  crowns,  i.  226, 

227 
Henry    VIII.,    his    sign    manual 

afi&xed  by  a  stamp,  i.  217 ;  his 

crown  revenues,  227 
Herbert,  Mr.,  his  bill  as  to  the  ex- 
pulsion of  members,  ii.  19 
Heron,  Sir  E.,  his  bill  for  shorten- 
ing the  duration  of  parliament, 

i.  442 
Hewley,   Lady,   the    case   of    her 

charities,  iii.  199 
Hindon,  bribery  at,  i.  340 
Hobhouse,Mr.,  committed  for  libel- 
ling the  house  of  commons,  ii.  60 
HobhtSuse,  Sir  J.,  his  vestry  Act, 

iii.  277 
Hoghton,  Sir    H.,  his  Dissenters 

Eelief  Bills,  iii.  93 
Holdernesse,    Lord,   retired    from 

office  in  favour  of  Lord  Bute,  i. 

19 
Holland,  Lord,  his  amendment  for 

an    address  to    the    Prince    of 

Wales,  i.  210 
Hone,  W.,  trials  of,  for  libel,  ii. 

349 
Horner,  Mr.  F.,  his  speech  against 

a  regency  bill,  i.  210 
Horsley,   Bishop,   his    opinion  on 

the  rights  of  the  people,  ii.  319  ; 

amends  the  Protestant  Catholic 

Dissenters  Bill,  iii.  106 
Household,  the.    8ee  Eoyal  House- 
hold 
House    tax,    the.     Lord    Derby's 

ministry  defeated  on,  ii.  102 
Howard,  Messrs.,  reprimanded  for 

conducting  Stockdale's  action,  ii. 

80 ;   committed,    81 ;    sued   the 

sergeant-at-arms,  82 
Howick,   Lord,    denounced   secret 

advice   to   crown,   i.    Ill,    112. 

&ee  also  Grey,  Earl 
Hudson,  Dr.,  tried  for  sedition,  ii. 

290 
Hudson's   Bay  Company,  the,   ii. 

615 
Hume,   Mr.,   his    motion   against 

Orange   lodges  in  the  army,  ii. 


402 ;  his  scheme  for  voluntary 
enlistment,  iii.  24 ;  his  proposed 
reform  of  county  administration, 
297  ;  his  exertions  in  revision  of 
official  salaries,  386 

Hunt,  Leigh,  tried  for  libel,  ii.  335 

Hunt,  Mr.,  headed  the  Manchester 
meeting,  ii.  354 ;  tried  for  sedi- 
tion, 363 

Huskisson,  Mr.,  his  prophecy  as 
to  reform  in  Parliament,  i,  416 ; 
his  commercial  policy,  ii:  187,  iii. 
417 

Hyde  Park,  meeting  in,  prohibited 
1866,  iii.  434 ;  park  railings  pulled 
down,  and  riots  in  the  park, 
ib. ;  another  meeting  prohi- 
bited in  1867,  but  held  in  defi- 
ance of  government,  437  ;  failure 
of  a  bill  to  give  additional 
powers  to  government,  439 ;  un- 
settled state  of  the  law,  ib. 


IMPEACHMENT  of  ministers 
by  parliament,  ii.  92  ;  rare  in 
later  times,  93  ;  not  abated  by 
a  dissolution,  ib. 

Impressment,  for  the  army,  iii.  20  ; 
for  the  na-vy,  21 

Imprisonment,  for  debts  to  the 
crown,  iii.  25 ;  contempt  of 
court,  26 ;  on  mesne  process, 
29 ;  for  debt,  31.  See  also  Pri- 
sons 

Indemnity  Acts,  the,  on  expiration 
of  the  Habeas  Corpus  Suspen- 
sion Acts,  iii.  15,  16; An- 
nual, the  first  passed,  82,  n. 

Independents,  the,  their  tenets,  iii. 
67  ;  their  toleration,  73  ;  num- 
bers, &c.,  222,  224,  52. 

India  Bill,  the  (1783),  thrown  out 
by  inifuenee  of  the  crown,  i.  71 

India.     See  East  India 

Informers.     See  Spies 

Insolvent  debtors,  laws  for  the  re- 
lief of,  iii.  34 

Ireland,  the  position  of  the  Church 
in,  caused  alarm  to  William  IV., 


Index. 


475 


i.  145 ;  number  of  archbishops 
and  bishops  of,  281 ;  lost  their 
seats  in  Parliament  by  Act  of 
1869,     ih.     n.;     representative 

bishops  of,  ib. ; civil  list  of, 

245  ;  pensions  on  the  crown  re- 
venues of,  257,  258  ;  consolidated 
with  English  pension  list,  261  ; 

the    parliament    of,   their 

proceedings  on  the  regency,  194; 
address  the  Prince,  ib. ;  Irish 
office-Tiolders  disqualified  for 
parliament,  373  ; the  repre- 
sentative peers  of,  280 ;  restric- 
tion upon  the  number  of  the 
Irish  peerage,  -ib. ;  its  absorption 
into  the  peerage  of  the  United 
Kingdom,  289 ;  Irish  peers  sit 
•  in  the  Commons,  281 ; re- 
presentation of,  prior  to  the 
Keform  Bill,  359,  361  ;  nomina- 
tion boroughs  abolished  at  the 
Union,  360 ;  Irish  judges  dis- 
qualified, 375 ; the  Keform 

Act  of,  430;  amended  (1850), 
ib. ;  the  Keformation  in,  iii.  70  ; 
dangerous  state  of,  1823-25, 
154 ;  and  in  1828,  163  ;  burial 
grounds  in,  open  to  all  persua- 
sions, 194;  the  tithe  question, 
256,  263-268;  national  educa- 
tion, 270,  413;  Maynooth  and 
Queen's  Colleges,  270 ;  Grovern- 
ment  of  Ireland  prior  to  the 
Union,  299;  the  parliament, 
300;  the  executive,  302;  power 
monopolised  by  churchmen,  ib. ; 
supremacy  of  English  G-overn- 
ment,  303 ;  commercial  restric- 
tions, 305 ;  partially  removed, 
310,  312;  residence  of  lord- 
lieutenant  enforced,  302,  306; 
conflicts  between  the  Commons 
and  the  Executive,  307;  state  of 
Ireland,  1776,  308;  the  volun- 
teers, 311;  they  agitate  for  in- 
dependence and  parliamentary 
reform,  312-315,  318;  the  con- 
vention at  Dungannon,  314; 
independence  granted,  316;  ad- 


mission of  Catholics  to  the 
elective  franchise,  110,  322  ;  the 
United  Irishmen,  ii.  329,  iii. 
322  ;  feuds  between  Protestants 
and  Catholics,  324;  the  rebel- 
lion of  1798,  325;  Union  with 
England  concerted,  327;  oppo- 
sition bought  off,  330;  the 
Union  effected,  333;  its  results, 
ib. ;  effect  of  Catholic  relief  and 
reform  in  the  representation, 
172,  335;  present  position  of 
Ireland,  ^. ;  and  of  its  Catholic 
inhabitants,  336  ;  the  number  of 
Irishmen  on  the  English  bench, 

337,  n.;  corporate  reform, 

290;  new  poor  law  introduced 
into,  408 ;  disestablishment  of 
the  Irish  Church,  1869,447; 
the  Irish  land  bill,  1870,  448 
Imham,  Lord,  his  daughter  mar- 
ried to  the  Duke  of  Cumberland, 
i.  262 


JAMAICA,  colonial  institutions 
in,  iii.  340,  356;  contumacy 
of  assembly  repressed,  364 

James  I.,  his  crown  revenues,  i. 
227 

James  II.,  expelled  by  union  of 
church  and  dissenters,  iii.  77; 
his  proposal  to  tax  colony  of 
Massachusetts,  343 

Jews,  the  admission  of,  to  parlia- 
ment, ii.  84 ;  naturalisation 
Act  of,  1754,  repealed,  266; 
tolerated  by  Cromwell,  iii.  73; 
excepted  from  Lord  Hardwicke's 
Marriage  Act,  151;  the  first 
motions  for  their  relief,  178  ; 
Mr.  Grant's  motions,  ib.,  181 ; 
Jews  admitted  to  corporations, 
182  ;  returns  of  Baron  Koths- 
child  and  Mr.  Salomons,  183, 
184;  attempt  to  admit  Jews 
underdeclaration,  185;  the  Re- 
lief Acts,  186,  187;  number  of, 
returned,  ib. 

Johnson,  Dr.,  a  compiler  of  parlia- 


476 


Index. 


mentary  reports,  ii.  36,  37,  50, 
113,  w. 

Jones,  Mr.  Grale,  committed  for 
libel  on  the  House  of  Commons, 
ii.  60 

Judges,  the  introduction  of  a  judge 
into  the  Grenville  cabinet,  i. 
103  ;  disqualified  from  parlia- 
ment, 375;  except  the  Master  of 
the  KoUs,  ih. ;  their  conduct  in 
libel  cases,  ii.  348,  349;  number 
of  Irishmen  on  the  English 
bench,  iii.  337,  n.;  spirit  and 
temper  of  the  judges,  391 ;  their 
tenure  of  oflBce  assured,  392 

Junius,  the  letter  of,  to  the  king, 
ii.  252 

Juries,  rights  of,  in  libel  cases,  ii. 
253-263 


KENNINGTON  COMMON, 
Chartist  meeting  at,  ii.  410 

Kent,  Duchess  of,  appointed  Ee- 
gent  (1830),  i.  221 

Kentish  petitioners  imprisoned  by 
the  Commons,  ii-  62 

Kenyon,  Lord,  his  opinion  on  the 
coronation  oath,  i.  93 

Kersal  Moor,  Chartist  meeting  at, 
ii.  409 ;  election  of  popular  re- 
presentative at,  ib. 

King,  Lord,  moved  to  omit  Lord 
Eldon's  name  from  the  council 
of  regency,  i.  205 

King,  questions  as  to  accession  of 
an  infant  king,  i.  219 ;  as  to  the 
rights  of  a  king's  posthumous 
child,  222;  rights  of  a  king  over 
the  royal  family,  262.  See  also 
Crown,  the. 

*  King's  Friends,  the,'  the  party  so 
called,  i,  13 ;  their  influence, 
35;  led  by  Addington,  100, 
103;  their  activity  against  the 
Army  Service  Bill,  106;  the 
'nabobs' rank  themselves  among 
them,  335 ;  a  section  of  the 
Tory  party,  ii.  143;  estranged 
from  Pitt,  176;    coalesce    "with 


the  Whigs,  177  ;  estranged  from 

them,  179 
Knight's  (a  negro)  case,  iii.  37 
Knighthood,  the  orders  of,  i.  324 


LADIES,  debates  in  the  Commons 
attended  by,  ii.  29  ;  their  ex- 
clusion, 52,  n. 

Lambton,  Mr.,  his  motion  for  re- 
form, i.  361,  410 

Lancaster,  Duchy  of,  the  revenues 
of,  attached  to  the  crown,  i.  227, 
235,  248  ;  present  amount,  ib. 

Land  bill  (Ireland)  1870,  iii.  448 

Land  revenues  of  the  crown.  Sec 
Revenues  of  the  Crown 

Land  tax,  the,  allowed  twice  over 
to  crown  tenantry,  i.  253  ;  se- 
duced by  vote  of  the  Commons, 
ii.  101  ;  third  reading  of  a  land 
tax  bill  delayed,  i.  74 ;  ii.  103 

Lansdowne,  Marquess  of,  his  a- 
mendment  to  resolutions  for  a 
regency,  i.  212;  his  motions  re- 
specting the  marriages  of  Catho- 
lics and  Dissenters,  iii.  152 ;  for 
relief  of  English  Catholics,  ib. 

Lauderdale,  Earl  of,  condemned 
the  King's  conduct  to  the  Gren- 
ville ministry,  i.  115 

Law,  the,  improvement  in  the  spirit 
and  administration  of,  iii.  389  ; 
legal  sinecures  abolished,  390 

Legislatorial  attornies,  election  of, 
at  public  meetings,  ii.  351 ;  prac- 
tice of,  imitated  by  the  Chartists, 
408 

Leicester,  case  of  bribery  from  cor- 
porate funds  of  the  borough  of, 
i.  413 

Lennox,  Lady  S.,  admired  by  George 
IIL,  i.  263 

Lethendy  case,  the,  iii.  245 

Letters,  opened  at  the  Post-ofiSce, 
by  government,  iii.  44  ;  the  for- 
mer practice,  45,  and  n. ;  case  of, 
in  1844,  46 

Libel,  the  Libel  Act,  ii.  260-264  ; 
Lord  Sidmouth's  circular  to  the 


Index, 


lord-lieutenants  respecting  sedi- 
tious libels,  ii.  345  ;  conduct  of 
judges  in  libel  cases,  348,  349. 
See  also  Sedition,  &c. 

Liberal  Party,  the.     8ee  Party 

Liberty  of  opinion.  8ee  Opinion, 
Liberty  of 

Liberty  of  the  subject.  See  Subject, 
Liberty  of 

Licensing  Act,  the,  ii.  242;  not  re- 
newed, 243 

Life  peerages,  i.  290 ;  to  women,  292 ; 
the  Wensleydale  peerage  case, 
295 

Liverpool,  Earl  of,  his  ministry,  i. 
128;  conducted  the  proceedings 
against  Queen  Caroline,  130  ;  his 
administration,  ii.  182,187;  dis- 
union of  the  Tories  on  his  death, 
189  ;  his  ministry  and  the  Cath- 
olic question,  iii.  140 

Loans  to  government,  members 
bribed  by  shares  in,  i.  382 ;  ces- 
sation of  the  system,  386 

Local  government,  the  basis  of  con- 
stitutional freedom,  iii.  275; 
vestries,  open  and  select,  276  ; 
Vestry  Acts,  ih.,  Ill ;  municipal 
corporations  before  and  after  re- 
form, 278-294;  local  boards, 
296;  courts  of  quarter  sessions, 
297 

Logan,  the  Rev.,  his  defence  of 
Warren  Hastings,  ii.  259 

London,  city  of,  address  George  III. 
condemning  the  proceedings 
against  "Wilkes,  ii.  20 

London,  Corporation  of,  extortion 
practised  by,  on  dissenters,  iii. 
90 ;  address  of  the  Common 
Council  on  the  Manchester  mas- 
sacre, ii.  356 ;  schemes  for  its  re- 
form, iii.  286 

London  Corresponding  Society,  the, 
ii.  282,  283;  reported  on  by  a 
secret  committee,  302;  trial  of 
members  of,  for  high  treason,  307; 
inflames  public  discontent,  315; 
calls  a  meeting  at  Copenhagen 
House,  ih. ;  address  on  an  attack 


477 

LOR 

on  George  III.,  324;  increased 
activity  of,  328;  suppressed  bv 
Act,  329  ^ 

London  Magazine,  the,  one  of  the 
first  to  report  parliamentary  de- 
bated, ii.  36 

London  University,  founded,  iii.  1 98 

Lord-lieutenant  of  Ireland,  the 
residence  of,  enforced,  iii.  306 

Lords,  House  of,  relations  of,  with 
the  crown,  i,  2, 307 ;  the  influence 
of  the  crown  exerted  over  the 
Lords,  23,  54,  66,  143,  312  ;  de- 
bates on  the  influence  of  the 
crown,  52 ;  rejection  of  the 
India  Bill  by  the  Lords,  71 ;  they 
condemn  the  Commons'  opposi- 
tion to  Mr.  Pitt,  79 ;  their  pro- 
ceedings on  the  reform  bills,  142, 
308,  424  ;  the  proposed  creation 
of  peers,  143,  312,  426;  position 
of  the  house  in  the  state,  273, 
302 ;  increase  of  its  numbers, 
274-282;  such  enlargement  a 
source  of  strength,  303 ;  twelve 
peers  created  in  one  day  by 
Queen  Anne,  274 ;  the  represen- 
tative peers  of  Scotland  and  Ire- 
land, lb.,  280  ;  proposed  restric- 
tions upon  the  power  of  the 
crown,  and  the  regent,  in  the  cre- 
ation of  peers,  275,  278 ;  pro- 
fuse creations  by  George  III., 
277 ;  composition  of  the  house  in 
1860,  282;  its  representative 
character,  285 ;  the  rights  of  peers 
of  Scotland,  286 ;  the  appellate  ju- 
risdiction of  the  Lord?,  290  ;  bill 
to  improve  it,  298  ;  the  life-peer- 
age question,  291 ;  Lords  spiri- 
tual, 299  ;  their  past  and  present 
number,  ih. ;  attempts  to  exclude 
them,  300 ;  the  political  position 
of  the  house,  302  ;  the  influence 
of  parties,  305;  collisions  between 
the  two  houses,  306  ;  the  danger 
now  increased,  307  ;  the  creation 
of  sixteen  peers  by  William  IV., 
309 ;  creation  of  new  peers 
equivalent  to  a  dissolution,  315 ; 


4/8 


Index, 


position  of  the  house  since  re- 
form, 316;  their  independence, 
317;  the  scanty  attendance  in 
the  house,  320  ;  smallness  of  the 
quorum,  321  ;  indifference  to 
business,  ib. ;  deference  to  lead- 
ers, ih. ;  influence  of  peers  over 
the  Commons  through  nomina- 
tion boroughs,  333  ;  and  through 
territorial  influence,  353,  362 ; 
refusal  of  the  Lords  to  indemnify 
the  witnesses  against  Walpole, 
378;  the  proceedings  against 
Wilkes,  ii.  5,  10;  the  book 
'  Droit  le  Koi '  burnt,  7 ;  their 
address  to  condemn  the  city  ad- 
dress on  the  Middlesex  election 
proceedings,  21 ;  debates  on  those 
proceedings,  16,  22;  strangers 
and  members  excluded  from  de- 
bates, 30,  52 ;  scene  on  one  oc- 
casion, 31 ;  report  of  debates 
permitted,  49,  54;  presence  of 
strangers  at  divisions,  57;  pub- 
licity given  to  committee  pro- 
ceedings, 58 ;  to  parliamentary 
papers,  ih. ;  the  privilege  to  ser- 
vants discontinued,  73;  and  of 
prisoners  kneeling  at  the  bar,  74 ; 
the  control  of  the  Lords  over  the 
executive  government,  85 ;  they 
advise  the  crown  on  questions  of 
peace  and  war,  and  of  a  dissolu- 
tion, 86 ;  their  rejection  of  a 
money  bill,  105  ;  relative  rights 
of  the  two  houses,  108  ;  conduct 
of  the  house  in  debate,  125; 
the  Catholic  peers  take  their 
seats,  iii.  174.  See  also  Parlia- 
ment ;  Peerage  ;  Peers. 

Lords,  House  of  (Ireland),  compo- 
sition of,  iii.  300 

Lords  spiritual.     See  Bishops 

Lottery  tickets  (government),  mem- 
bers bribed  by,  i.  384 

Lowe,  Mr.,  his  opposition  to  the 
reform  bill,  1866,  431;  a  mem- 
ber of  Mr.  Gladstone's  cabinet, 
1868,  447 

Loughborough,    Lord,    joins     the  > 


Tories,  ii.  166 ;  prompts  the  re- 
pressive policy  of  the  govern- 
ment, 286 

Luddites,  the,  outrages  of,  ii.  340 

Ludgershall,  price  of  seat,  i.  339 

Lunatics,  a  state  provision  for,  iii. 
409 

Lushington,  Dr.,  a  life  peerage 
offered  to,  i.  294;  disqualified 
from  parliament,  317 

Luttre]],  Colonel,  his  sister  mar- 
ried to  the  Duke  of  Cumberland, 
i.  262 ;  opposed  Wilkes  for  Mid- 
dlesex, ii.  14;  enforced  the  exclu- 
sion of  reporters,  51 

Lyndhurst,  Lord,  his  motion  on  the 
life-peerage  case,  i.  295  ;  brought 
in  the  Dissenters'  Chapels  Bill, 
iii.  200 

Lyttelton,  Lord,  his  address  res- 
pecting the  regency,  i.  172  ;  his 
complaint  against  the  book 
called  '  Droit  le  Roi,'  ii.  7 

Lyttleton,  Mr.,  his  motion  on  the 
dismissal  of  the  Grenville  minis- 
try, i.  116 


MACCLESFIELD,  Lord,  his  de- 
cision touching  the  rights  of 
the  king  over  his  grandchildren, 
i.  264 

Mackenzie,  Mr,  S.,  dismissed  from 
office,  i.  34 

Mackintosh,  Sir  J.,  his  defence  of 
Peltier,  ii.  333  ;  his  efforts  to  re- 
form the  criminal  code,  iii.  397 

M'Laren  and  Baird,  trial  of,  for 
sedition,  ii.  351 

Magistrates,  military  interference 
in  absence  of,  ii.  276  ;  the  sum- 
mary jurisdiction  of,  iii.  404 

Manchester,  Duke  of,  strangers  ex- 
cluded on  his  motion  relative  to 
war  with  Spain,  ii.  31 

Manchester,  public  meeting  at,  ii. 
353  ;  the  massacre,  354  ;  debates 
thereon  in  Parliament,  35o-3o8 

Mansfield,  Lord,  exhorted  George 
III.  to  exert  his  influence  over 


Index. 


479 


MAX 

parliament,  i.  37  ;  the  precedent 
of  his  admission  to  the  cabinet 
cited,  10-4;  his  opinion  on  the 
right  of  the  Commons  to  incapa- 
citate Wilkes,  ii.  16,  22  ;  accused 
by  Wilkes  of  altering  a  record, 
9 ;  his  decisions  touching  the 
rights  of  juries  in  libel  cases,  ii. 
263,  258 ;  produced  the  judg- 
ment in  Woodfall's  case  to  the 
House  of  Lords,  256 ;  his  house 
burnt  by  the  Protestant  rioters, 
275  ;  his  opinion  on  military  in- 
terference in  absence  of  a  magis- 
trate, 276  ;  his  decision  in  the 
negro  case,  iii.  36 ;  and  recog- 
nising toleration,  91  ;  his  tolerant 
acquittal  of  a  priest,  96 ;  a  cabi- 
net minister,  392 
Manufacturing    districts,   state   of 

the,  ii.  352,  iii.  211 
Maichmont,  Lord,  his  motion  on 
the  Middlesex  election  proceed- 
ings, ii.  19 
Margarot,  M.,  trial  of,  for  sedition, 

ii.  298 
^Marriages,    laws  affecting  the,  of 
Dissenters    and    Catholics,    iii. 
151-153,     188-192;     effect    of 
Lord  Hardwicke's  Act,  151 
Martin.  Mr.,  his  duel  with  Wilkes, 

ii.  5' 
Mary  (Queen  of  England),  her  sign 
manual  afi&xed  by   a  stamp,  i. 
217 
Marvell,  A.,  reported  proceedings 

in  the  Commons,  ii.  35 
Massachusetts,  proposal  of  James 
II.  to  tax,  iii.  343;  constitution 
of,  suspended,  353 
Maynooth  College,  founded,  iii.  270 ; 
Peel's  endowment  of,  271;  popu- 
lar opposition  to,  ii. 
Mazzini,  J.,  his  letters  opened  by 

government,  iii.  46 

Meetings.     &c  Public  Meetings 

Melbourne,  Viscount,  in  office,  i. 

145;  his  sudden  dismissal,  146; 

reinstated,  153;  in  office  at  the 

.  accession  of  her  Majesty,   154; 


organised  her  household,  ih. ; 
kept  in  office  by  the  '  bedcham- 
ber question,'  155;  retired  from 
office,  158;  his  ministries,  ii. 
205,  206  ;  receives  a  deputation 
of  working  men,  389  ;  reception 
of  delegates  from  trades'  unions, 
405;  framed  the  Tithe  Commu- 
tation Act,  iii.  219;  and  the 
first  Irish  Corporations  Bill,  292 
Melville,  Lord,  his  impeachment, 
ii.  93 ;  impeachment  of,  a  blow  to 
the  Scotch  Tories,  ii.  180 
Members  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, number  of  nominee  mem- 
bers prior  to  reform,  i.  361 ; 
members  bribed  by  pensions, 
369;  bribery  under  Charles  II., 
876;  under  William  IIL,  377; 
George  II.,  378;  and  George  IIL, 
ih.,  381 ;  bribed  by  loans  and  lot- 
teries, 382  ;  by  contracts,  387 ; 
wages  to,  provided  for  in  Lord 
Blandford's  reform  bill,  412; 
the  abolition  of  property  qualifi- 
cations, 448;  their  exclusion 
from  the  House  of  Lords,  ii.  31 ; 
the  system  of  pledges  to  con- 
stituents considered,  70;  certain 
privileges  of,  discontinued,  73. 
See,  also  Commons,  House  of 

Meredith,  Sir  W.,his  speech  against 
capital  punishments,  iii.  395 

Middle  classes,  the,  strength  given 
to  Whigs  by  adhesion  of,ii.  186, 
196,  365  ;  a  combination  of  the 
working  and  middle  classes  ne- 
cessary to  successful  agitation, 
384,  416 

Middlesex,  electors  of,  cause  of, 
supported  by  public  meetings,  ii. 
268 

Middlesex  Journal,  the,  complaint 
against,  for  misrepresenting  de- 
bates, ii.  39 

Middlesex,  sheriffs  of,  committed 
by  the  House  in  the  Stockdalo 
actions,  ii.  80 

Military  officers,  deprived  of  com- 
mand for  opposition  to  the  policy 


48o 


Index. 


of  George  III.,  i.  28,  47;  this 
practice  condemned  under  the 
Kockingham  ministry,  34 

Military  and  Naval  Officers  Oaths 
Bill,  the,  iii.  143 

Militia,  the  Catholics  in,  ii.  114 

Miller,  proceeded  against  for  pub- 
lishing debates,  ii.  41  ;  inter- 
position of  the  city  authorities, 
ih.\  tried  for  publication  of  a 
libel,  254 

Mines,  labour  of  children,  &c., 
regulated  in,  iii.  411 

Ministers  of  the  crown,  the  respon- 
sibility of,  i.  6,  108  ;  regarded 
•with  jealousy  by  George  III.,  9  ; 
constitutional  relations  between 
the  crown  and  ministers,  14,  108, 
145, 154, 159, 205  ;  the  influence 
of  the  crown  exerted  against  its 
ministers,  36,  66,  90,  106;  ap- 
peals by  ministers  from  the 
House  of  Commons  to  the  people, 
by  dissolutions  of  parliament, 
86,  w.,  141,  150,  158,  308,  424, 
ii.  90  ;  the  pledge  exacted  by 
George  III.  of  his  ministers,  i. 
107  ;  ministers  supported  by  the 
crown  and  the  Commons  in  re- 
form, 142,  310,  424;  the  influ- 
ence of  great  families  over 
ministries,  165 ;  numerous  ap- 
plications to,  for  peerages,  283  ; 
votes  of  want  of  confidence,  57, 
77,  81,  ii.  90  ;  and  of  confidence, 
141,  425,  ii.  91 ;  ministers  im- 
peached by  the  Commons,  92 ; 
the  stability  of  recent  ministries 
considered,  95;  ministers  de- 
feated on  financial  measures, 
101  ;  increasing  influence  of 
public  opinion  over,  144,  186, 
264,  364 ;  the  principles  of  co- 
alition between,  157,  217  ;  re- 
sponsibility of  ministers  to  their 
supporters,  192,  214 ;  the  pre- 
miership rarely  held  by  the  head 
of  a  great  family,  229  ;  revision 
of  salaries  of,  iii.  387 

Minorities,  proposed  representation 


of,  at  elections,  in  reform  bill 
(1854),  i.  452;  Lord  Cairns's 
clause,  1867,  iii.  439 

Mohun,  Lord,  cudgelled  Dyer  for  a 
libel,  ii.  244 

Moira,  Earl,  his  mission  to  the 
Whig  leaders,  i.  125  ;  the 
'  household  question,'  126 

Moravians.     8ee  Quakers 

Morton,  Mr.,  moved  the  insertion 
of  the  Princess  of  Wales's  name 
into  the  Kegency  Bill,  i.  1 74 

Muir,  T.,  trial  of,  at  Edinburgh, 
for  sedition,  ii.  292  ;  comments 
thereon  in  Parliament,  299 

Municipal  Corporations.  See  Cor- 
porations 

Murray,  Lady  A.,  married  to  the 
Duke  of  Sussex,  i.  270 

Milrray,  Mr.,  his  refusal  to  kneel 
at  the  bar  of  the  Commons,  ii.  74 

Mutiny  bill,  the  passing  of,  post- 
poned, i.  82 

Mutiny  Act  (Ireland)  made  per- 
manent, iii.  313;  repealed,  310 


'  "VTABOBS,'  the,  their  bribery  at 
IM  elections,  i.  335,  338;  rank 
themselves  among  the  'King's 
friends,'  335 

Napoleon,  Eirst  Consul  of  Erance, 
demands  the  repression  of  the 
press,  ii.  332 ;  the  dismissal  of 
refugees,  iii.  54  ;  trial  of  Peltier 
for  libel  on,  ii.  333 

Naturalisation  Act,  passing  of,  iii.  53 

Navy,  impressment  for,  iii.  21 ; 
flogging  in,  abated,  405 

Negroes  freed  by  landing  in  Eng- 
land, iii.  35  ;  in  Scotland,  37  ? 
the  slave  trade  and  slavery  abo- 
lished, ii.  277,  404,  iii.  39 

New  Brunswick,  the  constitution 
of,  iii.  358 

Newcastle,  Duke  of,  in  office  at 
accession  of  George  III.,  i.  12  j 
his  resignation,  21  ;  dismissed 
from  his  lord-lieutenancy,  23 

Newenham,   Mr.,   his    motion  re- 


Index. 


481 


specting  the  debts  of  Prince  of 
Wales,  i.  251 

New  Shoreham,  voters  for  the 
borough  of,  disfranchised  for 
bribery,  i.  339 

Newfoundland,  the  constitution  of, 
iii.  358 

Newport,  the  Chartist  attack  on, 
ii.  409 

New  South  Wales,  a  legislature 
granted  to,  iii.  359  ;  transporta- 
tion to,  abolished,  ih. ;  demo- 
cratic constitution  of,  370 

Newspapers,  the  first,  ii.  240,  243  ; 
stamp  and  advertisement  duties 
first  imposed,  245 ;  increased, 
327 ;  removed,  380-383 ;  im- 
provement in  newspapers,  264, 
337  ;  commencement  of  '  The 
Times'  and  other  papers,  265,  n. ; 
measures  of  repression,  330,  358 

New  Zealand,  constitution  granted 
to,  iii.  372 

Nomination  boroughs.  (See  Boroughs 

Nonconformists.     See  Dissenters 

Norfolk,  Duke  of,  his  eldest  son 
abjured  the  Catholic  faith,  1780, 
iii.  99,  n. ;  his  Catholic  Ofl&cers 
Belief  BiU,  143;  enabled  by 
Act  to  serve  as  Earl  Marshal, 
154 

'North  Briton,'  the,  proceedings 
against,  ii.  248,  250,  iii.  2 

North,  Lord,  his  relations,  as  pre- 
mier, with  George  III.,  i.  44  ; 
his  complete  submission  to  the 
King,  44,  49,  58  ;  his  overtures 
to  Chatham,  48  ;  to  the  Whigs, 
49;  his  ministry  overthrown, 
56;  his  conduct  in  office  ap- 
proved by  the  King,  57  ;  joined 
the  '  coalition  ministry,'  63  ;  dis- 
missed from  office,  7 1 ;  liberal 
in  creation  of  peers,  277  ;  in  the 
bribery  of  members,  381  ;  with 
money  sent  by  George  III.,  ih. ; 
by  shares'  in  a  loan,  384  ;  his 
second  loan,  386  ;  approved  the 
Middlesex  election  proceedings, 
ii.  18,  24;  his  carriage  broken 


by  mob,  47  ;  his  personalities  in 
debate,  126  ;  in  office,  142,  145; 
driven  from  office,  150;  the 
Coalition,  153 ;  his  measure  to 
conciliate  the  American  colonies, 
iii.  355 

Northampton  borough,  cost  of  elec- 
toral contest  for  (1768),  i.  339  ; 
case  of  bribery  from  the  corporate 
funds  of,  413 

'  North  Briton  '  (No.  45),  the  pub- 
lication of,  ii.  3 ;  riot  at  the 
burning  of,  8 

Northumberland,  Duke  of,  sup- 
ported in  bribery  at  elections  by 
George  III.,  i.  341 

Norton,  Sir  F.  (the  speaker),  sup- 
ported Dunning's  resolutions,  i. 
53;  his  speech  to  George  III. 
touching  the  civil  list,  238,  239  ; 
altercations  with,  when  in  the 
chair,  ii,  128 

Nottingham  Castle,  burnt  by  mob, 
ii.  387 

Nova  Scotia,  responsible  govern- 
ment in,  iii.  368 

Nugent,  Lord,  his  bill  for  Catholic 
relief,  iii.  151 ;  obtained  relaxa- 
tion to  Irish  commerce,  310 


OCCASIONAL  CONFOEMITY 
ACT,  the,  iii.  82 

O'Connell,  Mr.,  advocated  universal 
suffrage,  &c.,i.  416 ;  reprimanded 
for  libelling  the  house,  ii.  60  ; 
his  position  as  an  orator,  121  ; 
leads  the  Irish  party,  ii.  201 ; 
heads  the  Catholic  Association, 
369  ;  agitates  for  repeal  of  the 
Union,  393 ;  trials  of,  394,  397  ; 
released  on  writ  of  error,  399 ; 
returned  for  Clare,  iii.  163  ;  his 
re-election  required,  174 ;  his 
motions  on  Irish  tithes  and 
Church,  260-267 

O'Connor,  F.,  presents  the  Chartis^ 
petition,  ii.  412,  413 

Octennial  Acf,  the  (Ireland),  iii. 
306 


TOL.  III. 


I  I 


482 


Index. 


OfiRcial  salaries,  revision  of,  since 
the  Keform  Act,  iii.  386 

Officers  under  the  crown,  disquali- 
fied from  sitting  in  parliament, 
i.  3-t8,  372;  number  of,  in  par- 
liament, 135,  374 

Oidfield,  Dr.,  his  statistics  of  par- 
liamentary patronage,  i,  361 

Oliver,  Mr.  Alderman,  proceeded 
against  by  the  Commons  for 
committing  their  messenger,  ii. 
44,  46 

Oliver,  the  government  spy,  iii.  41 

Onslow,  Mr.  G-.,  ordered  the  house 
to  be  cleared,  to  exclude  the 
peers,  ii.  32  ;  to  hinder  the  re- 
porting the  debates,  33 ;  com- 
plained of  the  publication  of  de- 
bates, 39 ;  the  soubriquet  given 
him  by  the  reporters,  38 

Opinion,  liberty  of,  the  last  liberty 
to  be  acquired,  ii.  238 ;  the 
press,  from  James  I.  till  the  ac- 
cession of  George  III,,  240  ;  the 
'  North  Briton'  prosecutions,  247  ; 
the  law  of  libel,  252  ;  political 
agitation  by  public  meetings, 
265  ;  by  associations,  269  ;  de- 
mocratic associations,  279  ;  re- 
pressive measures,  1792-99,  285; 
Napoleon  and  the  English  press, 
332 ;  the  press,  before  the  Ee- 
gency,  336  ;  repressive  measures 
under  the  Eegency,  340 ;  the 
contest  between  authority  and 
public  opinion  reviewed,  363 ; 
the  Catholic  Association,  368  ; 
the  press  under  George  IV., 
376;  its  freedom  established, 
379  ;  the  Reform  agitation,  383  ; 
for  repeal  of  the  Union,  393  ; 
Orange  lodges,  400 ;  trades' 
unions,  404 ;  the  Chartists,  407  ; 
the  Anti-Corn  Law  League,  413  ; 
political  agitation  reviewed,  417. 
See  also  Press ;  Political  Associa- 
tions ;  Public  Meetings 

Orange  societies,  suppressed  by 
Act,  ii.  371 ;  re^-ived,  373  ;  or- 
ganisation of,  400 ;  in  the  army, 


402 ;  dissolved,  403  ;  peculiar 
working  of  Orange  societies,  ih. 

Orators  and  oratory.  See  Parlia- 
mentary Oratory 

Orsini  conspiracy,  the,  plotted  in 
England,  iii.  57 

Oxford  University,  state  of  feeling 
at,  on  Catholic  relief,  iii.  137  ; 
admission  of  dissenters  to  de 
grees  at,  19S 

Oxford  borough,  the  seat  for,  sold 
by  the  corporation,  i.  338 


PAINE,  T.,  tried  for  seditious 
writings,  ii.  280 

Pains  and  penalties,  bill  of,  against 
Queen  Caroline,  i.  131 

Palmer,  the  Rev.  T.  F.,  trial  of, 
for  sedition,  ii.  296  ;  comments 
thereon  in  Parliament,  299 

Palmerston,  Viscount,  his  removal 
from  office,  1851,  i.  160  ;  the  re- 
form bill  of  his  ministry,  456 ; 
his  resolutions  on  the  Lords'  re- 
jection of  the  Paper  Duties  Bill, 
ii.  110  ;  adhered  to  Mr.  Canning, 
ii.  189  ;  in  the  Duke  of  Welling- 
ton's ministry,  192 ;  in  office, 
216 ;  secession  of  the  Peelites, 
219;  his  overthrow  in  1857  and 
1858,  220,  221,  iii.  58;  his 
second  ministry,  ii.  222 ;  politi- 
cal tranquillity  under  his  rule, 
iii.  426 ;  his  death,  429  ;  change 
of  policy  which  ensued,  430 

Papal  aggression,  1850,  the,  iii. 
227. Court,  diplomatic  rela- 
tions with,  Bill,  230,  n. 

Paper  duty,  the,  abolished,  ii.  382 

Paper  Duties  Repeal  Bill  (1860), 
rejected  by  the  Lords,  i.  318,  ii. 
108 

Parish,  the,  local  affairs  of,  admin- 
istered by  vestries,  iii.  276 

Parke,  Sir  J.  See  Wensleydale, 
Baron 

Parliament,  government  by,  es- 
tablished at  the  Revolution,  i.  1 ; 
constitutional  position  of,  at  the 


Index. 


483 


PAB 


accession  of  G-eorge  III.,  2,  16  ; 
violation  of  parliamentary  pri- 
vileges by  the  crown,  23,  28,  36, 
45,  54,  143  ;  the  reform  of  par- 
liament, 138,  308,  393  ;  the  dis- 
solution of,  of  1784,  86;  of 
1807,  116;  of  1830.  417;  of 
1831,  141,  424;  of  1834,  150; 
of  1841,  158;  influence  of  fami- 
lies over  parliament,  165;  the 
meeting  of  parliament  during 
G-eorge  III.'s  illnesses,  175,  207 ; 
commissions  for  opening  parlia- 
ment during  his  illness,  186, 213; 
second  opening  after  King's  re- 
covery (1789),  189 ;  adjourn- 
ments caused  by  King's  inability 
to  sign  the  commission  for  pro- 
rogation, 175,  207  :  parliament 
and  the  revenues  of  the  crown, 
and  the  civil  list,  229-260 ;  the 
duration  of  parliament,  440 ; 
motions  for  triennial  parlia- 
ments, 441  ;  time  between  sum- 
mons and  meeting  of,  shortened, 
449  ;  relations  of  parliament  to 
the  crown,  the  law,  and  the 
people,  ii.  1-112  ;  the  unreported 
parliament,  30,  «.;  publication 
of  the  debates  and  division  lists, 
34,  53,  55  ;  petitions  to  parlia- 
ment, 60 ;  the  publication  of 
parliamentary  papers,  58 ;  the 
relinquishment  of  certain  parlia- 
mentary privileges,  73;  priAnlege 
and  the  courts  of  law,  75  ;  the 
publication  of  papers  affecting 
character,  78  ;  control  of  parlia- 
ment over  the  executive  govern- 
ment, 85  ;  over  supplies  to  the 
crown,  108 ;  sketch  of  parlia- 
mentary oratory,  112  ;  group  of 
parliamentary  orators  of  the  age 
of  Chatham  and  Pitt,  113;  of 
later  times,  118;  character  of 
modern  oratory,  123 ;  the  per- 
sonalities of  former  times,  125  ; 
increased  authority  of  the  chair, 
128.  Secessions  of  the  Whigs 
from,  148,  173,  321;  repression  j 


of  the  press  by  Parliament,  244  ; 
attempted  intimidation  of,  by 
the  silk-weavers,  266;  by  tlio 
Protestant  Associations,  272 ; 
relations  of  the  Church  and  Par- 
liament, iii.  226  ;  supremacy  of, 
over  the  Irish  Parliament,  305 ; 
Parliament  since  the  Reform 
Act,  385  ;  vast  amount  of  public 
business,  422.  /Sec gZso  Commons, 
House  of ;  Lords,  House  of 

Parliament  (Ireland),  state  of,  be- 
fore the  Union,  iii.  299;  exclu- 
sion of  Catholics,  ih.,  303;  ex- 
pired only  on  demise  of  the 
Crown,  301 ;  Poynings'  Act, 
303 ;  supremacy  of  the  English 
Parliament,  305;  agitation  for 
independence,  312,  315 ;  sub- 
mits to  the  permanent  Mutiny 
Bill,  313;  independence  granted, 
316;  corrupt  influence  of  the 
government,  317;  motions  for 
Parliamentary  Eeform,  319  ;  the 
Union  carried,  329 

Parnell,  Sir  H.,  his  views  of  finan- 
cial policy,  iii.  419 

Party,  influence  of,  in  party  go- 
vernment, ii.  131 ;  origin  of 
parties,  133  ;  parties  imder  the 
Stuarts,  and  aft^r  the  Revolu- 
tion, 134,  136;  Whigs  and  To- 
ries, 135  ;  their  distinctive 
principles,  138,  144,  223  ;  par- 
ties on  the  accession  of  George 
III.,  140,  145  ;  the  American 
war  a  test  of  party  principles, 
147 ;  secessions  of  the  Whigs 
from  Parliament,  148.  ]  73,  321 ; 
overtures  to  the  Whigs,  150 ; 
commencement  of  a  democratic 
party,  151 ;  crisis  on  death  of 
Lord  Rockingham,  ih. ;  the  Coa- 
lition, 153-155;  ruin  of  the 
Whigs,  156;  principles  of  coali- 
tion, 157 ;  the  Tories  under  Mr. 
Pitt,  158,  168;  the  Whigs  and 
the  Prince  of  Wales,  16i,  178, 
182  ;  effect  of  the  French  Revo- 
lution upon   parties,  163,   166; 


I   I  2 


484 


Index. 


position  of  the  Whigs,  164,  167, 
171  ;  the  Tories  in  Scotland, 
171;  schism  among  the  Tories, 
174 ;  parties  on  Pitt's  retire- 
ment from  office,  175  ;  the  "Whigs 
in  office,  1806,  177-179,  iii. 
124;  coalesce  with  Lord  Sid- 
mouth's  party,  ii.  177 ;  theTories 
reinstated,  179  ;  position  of  the 
Whigs,  180 ;  the  strength  they 
derived  from  the  adhesion  of  the 
middle  classes,  181,  365;  the 
Tories  under  Lord  Liverpool, 
182-189  ;  under  Canning,  189  ; 
influence  of  national  distress, 
and  of  proceedings  against  Queen 
Caroline,  upon  parties,  185,  186  ; 
increase  of  liberal  feeling,  107  ; 
effect  of  the  Catholic  question 
upon  parties,  190,  192,  iii.  129, 
140,  168;  party  divisions  after 
Mr.  Canning's  death,  ii,  191 ; 
the  Duke  of  Wellington's  mi- 
nistry, ih. ;  secession  of  liberal 
members  from  his  cabinet,  192; 
the  Whigs  restored  to  office, 
195  ;  supported  by  the  demo- 
cratic party,  196;  Whig  ascen- 
dency after  the  Eeform  Acts, 
198 ;  state  of  parties,  ih. ;  the 
Eadicals,  ih. ;  the  Irish  party, 
201 ;  the  Tories  become  '  Con- 
servatives,' 203 ;  increase  in 
power,  -ih. ;  breaking  up  of  Earl 
Grey's  ministry,  204 ;  dismissal 
of  Lord  Melbourne's  ministry, 
205 ;  Liberals  reunited  against 
Sir  E.  Peel,  ih. ;  his  liberal  po- 
licy alarms  the  Tories,  ih. ;  par- 
ties under  Lord  Melbourne,  206 ; 
a  conservative  reaction,  208  ; 
effect  of  Peel's  free-trade  policy 
upon  the  Conservatives,  211, 
212  ;  the  obligations  of  a  party 
leader,  214  ;  the  Whigs  in  office, 
216;  Lord  Derby's  first  ministry, 
ih.;  coalition  of  Whigs  andPeel- 
ites  under  Lord  Aberdeen,  217  ; 
fall  of  his  ministry,  218  ;  the 
Peelites  retire  from  Lord  Palmer- 


ston's  first  administration,  219  ; 
his  overthrows,  in  1857  and 
1858,  220;  Lord  Derby's  second 
ministry,  221 ;  passed  the  Jew- 
ish Eelief  Act,  iii.  1 86 ;  Lord 
Palmerston's  second  adminis- 
tration, ii.  222 ;  fusion  of  par- 
ties, 223;  essential  difference 
between  Conservatives  and  Li- 
berals, ih. ;  party  sections,  224  ; 
changes  in  the  character,  &c., 
of  parties,  225  ;  politics  formerly 
a  profession,  227  ;  effects  of 
Parliamentary  Eeform  on  par- 
ties, 230;  the  conservatism  of 
age,  232 ;  statesmen  under  old 
and  new  systems,  ih.;  patron- 
age, an  instrument  of  party, 
234 ;  review  of  the  merits  and 
evils  of  party,  236  ;  the  press  an 
instrument  oft  party,  244,  264, 
265;  opposition  of  the  Whigs 
to  a  repressive  policy,  288,  357; 
to  the  Six  Acts,  358 ;  the  Habeas 
Corpus  Suspension  Bills,  311, 
iii.  12-19  ;  the  Treasonable 
Practices,  &c.  Bills,  ii.  317- 
323  ;  the  Irish  Church  appro- 
priation question  adopted  by  the 
Whigs,  iii.  266;  abandoned  by 
them,  268 

Patronage,  an  instrument  of  party, 
ii.  234  ;  the  effect  of  competi- 
tion, 235 ;  abuses  of  colonial 
patronage,  iii.  362  ;  surrendered 
to  the  colonies,  363 

Patronage  Act  (Scotland),  iii.  253. 
See  also  Church  of  Scotland 

Pease,  Mr.,  his  case  cited  regard- 
ing Jewish  disabilities,  i.  85 

Peel,  Mr.     See  Peel,  Sir  E. 

Peel,  Sir  E.,  the  first,  his  Factory 
Children  Act,  iii.  411 

Peel,  Sir  E.,  obtained  the  con- 
sent of  George  IV.  to  Catho- 
lic emancipation,  i.  137  ;  his 
first  administration,  148 ;  his 
absence  abroad,  ih. ;  his  mini- 
sterial efforts,  150;  advised 
a  dissolution,  ih. ;    resignation. 


Index. 


485 


153  ;  declines  to  take  office  on 
the  '  bedchamber  question,'  155  ; 
his  second  administration,  158; 
his  anti -reform  declaration,  416; 
the  character  of  his  oratory,  ii. 
120;  his  commercial  policy,  ii. 
187,  iii.  418  ;  seceded  from  Can- 
ning on  the  Catholic  question, 
189 ;  opposes  that  measure,  iii. 
141,  149  ;  brings  in  the  Belief 
Act,  ii.  192,  iii.  168  ;  his  first 
ministry,  ii.  205;  his  policy  and 
fall,  ih.,  iii.  267 ;  his  relation  to 
the  Conservatives,  ii.  209,  212; 
his  second  ministry,  209 ;  his 
free-trade  policy,  210  ;  repeal  of 
corn  laws,  212,  413,  416;  his 
obligations  as  a  party  leader, 
214;  obtains  the  bishops'  con- 
sent to  the  repeal  of  the  Corpo- 
ration and  Test  Acts,  iii.  ]  59  ; 
proposes  to  retire  from  the  Wel- 
lington ministry,  166;  loses  his 
seat  at  Oxford,  168;  the  Irish 
Franchise  Act,  172  ;  his  Dissen- 
ters' Marriage  Bills,  190  ;  plan 
for  commutation  of  Irish  Tithes, 
266 ;  resists  the  appropriation 
question,  ih. ;  proposes  endow- 
ment to  Maynooth  and  the 
Queen's  Colleges,  270;  his 
scheme  for  Irish  corporate  re- 
form, 294  ;  the  first  minister  to 
revise  the  criminal  code,  398 
Peerage,  the  number  of,  i.  73 ;  of 
the  United  Kingdom,  281  and 
n. ;  antiquity  of,  282;  claims  to, 
283  ;  changes  in  its  composition, 
284 ;  the  Scottish  peerage,  286  ; 
fusion  of  peerages  of  the  three 
kingdoms,  290;  life  peerages, 
291  ;  to  women,  292  ;  peerages 
with  remainders  over,  293 ;  au- 
thorities favouring  life  peer- 
ages, ih. ;  the  Wensleydale 
peerage  case,  295;  the  peerage 
in  its  social  relations,  322. 
8ee  also  Lords,  House  of;  Ire- 
land, Peerage  of;  Scotland, 
Peerage  of 


Peerage  Bill  (1720),  rejected  by 
the  Commons,  i.  275 

Peers,  scanty  attendance  of,  at  the 
house,  affecting  their  political 
weight,  i.  320 ;  their  influence 
over  borough  and  county  elec- 
tions, 333,  353  ;  their  exclusion 
from  debates  in  the  House  of 
Commons,  ii.  32 ;  the  Catholic, 
restored  to  the  privilege  of  ad- 
vising the  Crown,  iii.  107,  148  ; 
exempted  from  the  oath  of  su- 
premacy, 146 ;  the  Catholic  Peers 
BiU,  147 ;  take  seats  in  the  House 
of  Lords,  174;  creation  of,  to  carry 
the  Union  with  Ireland,  331.  See 
also  Lords,  House  of 

Pelham,  Mr.,  bribery  to  members, 
a  system  under,  i.  378 

Peltier,  J.,  trial  of,  for  libel,  ii. 
333 

Pembroke,  Earl  of,  proscribed  for 
opposition  to  court  policy,  i.  54 

Penryn,  the  disfranchisement  bill, 
i.  414 ;  the  proposal  to  transfer 
the  franchise  to  Manchester,  ib. 

Pensions  from  the  crown,  chained 
on  civil  list,  i.  256;  on  crown 
revenues,  ib. ;  restrained  by  par- 
liament, ih.,  258 ;  consolidation 
of  pension  list,  261 ;  the  regula- 
tion of  (1837),  ih. ;  bribery  by 
pensions,  369;  holders  of,  dis- 
qualified from  sitting  in  parlia- 
ment, ib. 

Perceval,  Mr.,  formed  an  adminis- 
tration, i.  108;  denied  giving 
secret  advice  to  George  III., 
110;  the  dissolution  during  his 
ministry,  116;  his  relations 
with  the  King,  117  ;  his  position 
at  commencement  of  regency, 
120;  obnoxious  to  the  Eegent 
as  adviser  of  Princess  Caroline, 
121 ;  ministerial  negotiations  at 
his  death,  125;  in  office,  ii.  179, 
182,  iii.  129 

Peto,  Sir  M.,  his  Dissenters  Burial 
Bills,  iii.  193 

Petitions  to  parliament,  the  right 


486 


Index. 


of  petitioning  endangered  by 
Geoi'ge  III.'s  answer  to  the  city 
address  touching  Wilkes,  ii.  20  ; 
the  commencement  of  the  prac- 
tice, 60 ;  of  political  petitions, 
61 ;  forbidden  under  Charles  II., 
ih.  J  petitions  rejected  and  peti- 
tioners imprisoned  by  the  Com- 
mons, 62  ;  commencement  of 
the  modern  system,  63  ;  objected 
to  by  George  III.,  65  ;  progress 
of  the  system,  ih. ;  the  numbers 
presented  of  late  years,  66,  n. ; 
abuses  of  petitioning,  68 ;  de- 
bates on  presentation  of,  re- 
strained, 69  ;  for  grant  of  public 
money  to  be  recommended  by 
the  crown,  103 

Phillimore,  Dr.,  his  Catholic  Mar- 
riages Bill,  iii.  163 

Pillory,  punishment  of,  abolished, 
iii.  400 

Pitt,  Mr.     Bee  Chatham,  Earl  of 

Pitt,  Mr.  William,  Chancellor  of 
the  Exchequer  under  Lord  Shel- 
burne,  i.  62 ;  his  first  refusals 
to  assume  the  government,  63, 
^b;  is*  premier,  71 ;  his  contest 
with  the  Commons,  72-83  ;  his 
final  triumph,  83  ;  reflections  on 
this  contest,  83-89;  his  relations 
with  George  III.,  87 ;  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  King  on  reform,  90 ; 
quitted  office  on  the  Catholic 
question,  97 ;  his  mismanage- 
ment of  that  question,  ih. ;  his 
pledge  to  the  King  not  to  revive 
it,  98  ;  again  in  office,  99 ;  with 
Addington,  101 ;  evaded  the  Ca- 
tholic question,  102  ;  his  opinion 
on  the  rights  of  Prince  of  Wales 
as  Eegent,  177-181 ;  his  letter 
to  him  respecting  the  regency, 
180;  movf;d  resolutions  for  a 
bill,  ih.,  18o  ;  proposition  as  to 
use  of  the  great  seal,  181,  186; 
introduced  the  bill,  189;  his 
conduct  in  these  proceedings 
considered,  193;  confirmed  the 
King's  confidence  in  him,  194; 


embarrassment  caused  by  the 
King's  illness  on  his  leaving 
office,  196;  brought  forward  the 
budget  after  his  resignation,  ih.  ; 
his  doubts  as  to  the  King's 
sanity,  on  his  return  to  office, 
20-1 ;  profuse  in  the  creation  of 
peers,  277,  279  ;  his  unfair  con- 
duct as  to  the  Westminster 
scrutiny,  351 ;  abolished  some  of 
the  Irish  nomination  boroughs, 
360 ;  discontinued  bribes  to 
members,  382 ;  by  loans  and 
lotteries,  386 ;  advocated  reform, 
396,  397  ;  his  reform  bill,  399  ; 
afterwards  opposed  reform,  402  ; 
his  position  as  an  orator,  ii.  113  ; 
Tory  principles  never  completely 
adopted  by,  ii.  146,  153  n..  158  ; 
entered  Parliament  as  a  Whig, 
152,  156 ;  the  leader  of  the 
Tories,  158  ;  his  first  ministry  a 
coalition,  157 ;  his  policy  con- 
trasted with  Mr.  Fox's,  153  w., 
159 ;  his  feelings  towards  the 
French  Eevolution,  163,  286; 
attempted  coalitions  with  Fox, 
165,  176 ;  joined  by  portion  of 
the  Whigs,  166;  the  consolida- 
tion of  his  power,  168,  286; 
dangerous  to  liberty,  173  ;  his 
liberal  views  on  Catholic  ques- 
tion, 174,  iii.  115-123,  333;  his 
retirement  from  office,  ii.  175; 
his  return,  176  ;  the  Tory  party 
after  his  death,  179  ;  member  of 
the  Constitutional  Information 
Society,  270,  282 ;  commences  a 
repressive  policy,  226 ;  brings 
in  the  Seditious  Meetings  Bill. 
319 ;  opposes  relief  to  dissenter:*, 
iii.  102-105,  109  ;  his  proposal 
for  commutation  of  Irish  tithes, 
256  ;  his  Irish  commercial  pro- 
positions, 320  ;  carried  the  Union 
with  Ireland,  330;  his  India 
Bill,  381 

Pitt,  Mr.  Thomas,  moved  to  delay 
the  grant  of  supplies,  ii.  102 

Pius    IX.,    his    brief    appointing 


Index. 


487 


bishops  in  England,  iii.  228  ;  and 
against  the  Queen's  Colleges,  274 

Placemen.  See  Officers  under  the 
Crown 

Pledges,  by  members  to  constitu- 
ents, considered,  ii.  70 

Plunket,  Lord,  the  character  of 
his  oratory,  ii.  120;  his  advo- 
cacy of  Catholic  relief,  iii.  146, 
150 

Police,  modern  system  of,  iii.  403 

Political  associations,  commence- 
ment of,  ii.  265,  268,  270 ;  for 
Parliamentary  Reform,  269, 383  ; 
Protestant  associations,  272-277, 
iii.  96 ;  anti-slave  trade,  ii.  277, 
404;  democratic,  279,  281,  315, 
324,  328;  proceeded  against, 
292,  304  ;  suppressed,  329,  343, 
359 ;  associations  for  suppress- 
ing sedition,  290,  367 ;  for  Ca- 
tholic relief,  368;  finally  sup- 
pressed, 375  ;  for  repeal  of  the 
Union  with  Ireland,  393 ;  Orange 
lodges,  400  ;  trades'  unions,  404  ; 
the  Chartists,  407;  the  Anti- 
Corn  Law  League,  413 

Ponsonby,  Mr.,  chosen  leader  of 
the  Whigs,  ii.  182 

Poole,  borough,  electoral  corrup- 
tion at,  i.  338 

Poor  laws,  the  old  and  new  sys- 
tems, iii.  405  ;  in  Scotland  and 
Ireland,  408 

Population,  great  increase  of,  in 
the  manufacturing  districts,  ii. 
352  ;  its  effect  on  the  position 
of  the  Church,  iii.  211 

Portland,  Earl  of  (1696),  the 
enormous  grant  to,  by  William 
IIL,  recalled,  i.  229 

Portland,  Duke  of,  headed  the 
•  coalition,'  i.  65  ;  assisted  George 
III.  in  opposing  the  Army  Ser- 
vice Bill,  106  ;  in  office,  108 

Post  Office.  See  Letters,  Opening 
at 

Potwallers,  the  electoral  rights  of, 
i.  331 

Poynings'  Act,  the,  iii.  303 


Pratt,  Lord  Chief  Justice.  See 
Camden,  Lord 

Presbyterians,  in  England,  iii.  67  ; 
in  Scotland,  68,  74  ;  in  Ireland, 
70,  268.    See  Church  of  Scotland 

Press,  the,  under  censorship,  ii. 
239 ;  from  the  Stuarts  to  ac- 
cession of  George  III.,  240-246 ; 
the  attacks  on  Lord  Bute,  247 ; 
general  warrants,  249  ;  the  pro- 
secutions of,  1763-1770,  250; 
publishers  liable  for  acts  of  ser- 
vants, 252  ;  the  rights  of  juries 
in  libel  cases,  253-263  ;  the  pro- 
gress of  free  discussion,  264, 
337,  364,  376,  383  ;  caricatures, 
265  ;  laws  for  repression  of  the 
press,  318,  327,  330,  348,  358  ; 
the  press  and  foreign  powers, 
332 ;  the  press  not  purified .  by 
rigour,  366 ;  complete  freedom 
of  the  press,  379;  fiscal  laws 
affecting,  380;  public  jealousies 
of,  382.  See  also  Opinion,  liberty 
of 

Prince  Regent.  See  Wales,  Prince  of 

Printers,  contest  of  the  Commons 
with,  ii.  33,  39.  See  also  De- 
bates in  Parliament 

Prisons,  debtors',  iii.  32 ;  improved 
state  of,  401 

Privileges  and  elections  committee, 
trial  of  election  petitions  before, 
i.  363 

Privileges  of  parliament.  See  Par- 
liament ;  Crown,  the 

Protection,  &c.,  against  Republi- 
cans' Society,  the,  ii.  291 

Protestant  associations,  the,  ii. 
272,  iii.  97  ;  the  petition,  and 
riots,  ii.  273,  iii.  97.  See  also 
Orange  Societies 

Protestant  Dissenters  Ministers 
Bill,  iii.  134 

Protestant  Catholic  Dissenters,  bill 
for  relief  of,  iii.  106 

Public  meetings,  commencement  of 
political  agitation  by,  ii.  265, 
268;  riotous  meetings  of  the 
silk-weavers,  226 ;  meetings  to 


488 


Index, 


support  the  Middlesex  electors, 
268  ;  for  Parliamentary  reform, 
1799,  ih. ;  in  179,5,  315 ;  in  1831, 
386 ;  of  the  Protestant  Associa- 
tion, 273,  iii.  97;  to  oppose theSe- 
dition  and  Treason  Acts,  ii.  324  ; 
in  the  manufacturing  districts, 
1819,  351 ;  for  Catholic  relief, 
373  ;  for  repeal  (Ireland),  393 ; 
of  the  trades'  unions,  405  ;  the 
Chartists,  407,  410  ;  the  Anti- 
Corn  Law  League,  413 ;  laws  to 
restrain  public  meetings,  319, 
343,  359 

Public  money,  difficulties  in  the 
issue  of,  caused  by  George  III.'s 
incapacity,  i.  214 ;  motions  for, 
to  be  recommended  by  the  crown, 
ii.  103 

Public  Opinion.  See  Opinion, 
Liberty  of;  Press,  the;  Politi- 
cal Associations;  Public  Meet- 
ings 

Public  Works  Commission,  the, 
separated  from  Woods  and  Fo- 
rests, i.  255 

Publishers,  criminally  liable  for 
acts  of  servants,  ii.  252 

Puritans,  the,  under  Queen  Eliza- 
beth, iii.  65 ;  under  James  I. 
and  Charles  II.,  71,  75;  num- 
bers imprisoned,  76.  See  also 
Dissenters 


QUAKERS,  number  of,  impri- 
soned, temp.  Chas.  II.,  iii.  76 ; 
motions  for  relief  of,  112;  ex- 
cepted from  Lord  Hardwicke's 
Marriage  Act,  151  ;  admitted  to 
the  Commons  on  making  an  affir- 
mation, 177.  /See  also  Dissenters 

Qualification  of  members,  the  Acts 
repealed,  i.  448 

Quarter  Sessions,  courts  of,  county 
rates  administered  by,  iii.  297 ; 
efforts  to  introduce  the  repre- 
sentative system  into,  ih. 

Queen's  Bench,  Court  of,  the  deci- 
sion in  favour  of  Stockdale,  ii. 


79,  80  ;  compelled  the  sheriffs  to 
pay  over  the  damages,  80 

Queensberry,  Duke  of,  his  rights  as 
a  peer  of  Great  Britain  and  of 
Scotland,  i.  286,  288 

Queen's  Colleges,  Ireland,  founded, 
iii.  273 ;  opposition  from  Catho- 
lic clergy,  274 

Quoad  sacra  ministers,  the,  in  the 
Church  of  Scotland,  iii.  249 


pADICAL  PARTY,     i^ee  Party 

Rawdon,  Lord,  moved  an  ad- 
dress to  the  Prince  of  Wales  to 
assume  the  regency,  i.  182 

Reeves,  Mr.,  his  pamphlet  con- 
demned, ii.  325 

Reform  in  parliament,  arguments 
for,  i.  393  ;  advocated  by  Chat- 
ham, ib. ;  Wilkes,  394  ;  the  Duke 
of  Richmond,  ib. ;  the  Gordon 
riots  unfavourable  to,  395  ;  Pitt's 
motions,  396  ;  discouraging  effect 
of  the  French  Revolution,  402  ; 
Earl  Grey's  first  reform  motions, 
403  ;  Sir  F.  Burdett's,  406,  407  ; 
Lord  John  Russell's,  408-413; 
Mr.  Lambton's,  410 ;  Lord  Bland- 
ford's,  412;  disfranchisement 
bills  for  bribery,  ib. ;  O'Connell's 
motion  for  universal  suffiiage, 
416;  the  dissolution  of  1830, 
417;  impulse  given  by  French 
Revolution,  ib. ;  storm  raised  by 
Duke  of  Wellington's  declara- 
tion, 418 ;  Lord  Brougham's  mo- 
tion, 420;  Lord  Grey's  reform 
ministry,  ib. ;  the  first  reform 
bill,  421 ;  ministers  defeated  by 
the  Commons,  141,  423 ;  sup- 
ported by  the  crown,  ib.,  424 ; 
the  dissolution  of  1831,  t6.  ;  the 
second  reform  bill,  142,424  ;  the 
bill  thrown  out  by  the   Lords, 

142,  308,  424;  proposed  creation 
of  peers,  143,  312,  425;  resig- 
nation  of  the  reform  ministry, 

143,  312,    426;    they  are   sup- 


Index. 


489 


ported  by  the  Commons  and  re- 
called to  ofi&ce,  143,  312,  426 ; 
the  third  bill  passed,  142,  312, 
427 ;  the  act  considered,  427 ; 
Scotch  and  Irish  reform  acts, 
429,  430 ;  the  Irish  franchise  ex- 
tended, 430  ;  the  political  results 
of  reform,  153,  431,  ii.  96; 
bribery  and  bribery  acts  since 
reform,  i.  431,  439;  triennial  par- 
liaments, 441  ;  vote  by  ballot, 
445  ;  reform,  later  measures  for, 
450  ;  obstacles  to  parliamentary 
reform,  458  ;  carried  by  the 
Whigs  as  leaders  of  the  people, 
ii.  196;  influence  of,  on  parties^ 
230  ;  on  official  emoluments,  iii. 
386 ;  on  law  reform,  and  amend- 
ment of  the  criminal  code,  387, 
393  ;  on  the  spirit  and  temper  of 
the  judges,  392  ;  on  the  condition 
of  the  people,  404  ;  on  commer- 
cial and  financial  policy,  415; 
on  Parliament,  422  ;  the  first  re- 
form meetings,  268 ;  and  in  Ire- 
land, iii.  318;  reform  discour- 
aged from  the  example  of  the 
French  Eevolution,  284,  360, 
364  ;  repressed  as  seditious,  292- 
299,  313,  351;  cause  of,  pro- 
moted by  political  agitation  and 
unions,  383 :  review  of  reform  agi- 
tation, 392  ;  in  abeyance  during 
the  last  years  of  Lord  Palmers- 
ton,  iii.  428 ;  revived  by  Earl 
Eussell  in  1866,  430;  his  reform 
bill,  431  ;  its  disastrous  issue, 
433  ;  position  of  Earl  of  Derby's 
ministry  in  regard  to  reform, 
435  ;  their  reform  bill  1867,  436  ; 
how  amended,  436  ;  its  ultimate 
form,  437;  the  Scotch  Eeform 
Act,  1868,  440  ;  other  supple- 
mentary measures  of  reform,  441 ; 
constitutional  importance  of  these 
measures,  ih. 
Eeformation,  the,  effect  of,  upon 
England,  iii.  61 ;  doctrinal  mode- 
ration of,  ii.  64 ;  in  Scotland,  68 ; 
in  Ireland,  70 


Reformatories  instituted,  iii.  403 

Refugees.     See  Aliens 

Regent,  the  Prince.  See  Wales, 
Prince  of 

Regency  Act,  the,  of  1751,  i.  168; 
of  1765,171-174;  the  Princess 
of  Wales  excluded  by  Lords,  and 
included  by  Commons  in  the  Act, 
173;  the  resolutions  for  a  Re- 
gency Bill  (1788-9),  180;  pro- 
posed restrictions  over  the  Re- 
gent's power  to  create  peers, 
278  ;  the  resolutions  accepted  by 
Prince  of  Wales,  185;  the  bill 
brought  in,  189  ;  its  progress  in- 
terrupted by  George  III.'s  re- 
covery, ih. ;  comments  on  these 
proceedings,  190 ;  comparison  of 
them  to  the  proceedings  at  the 
Revolution,  192 ;  the  Regency 
Act  of  1810,  debates  thereon, 
208  ;  resolutions  for  a  bill  agreed 
to,  210;  laid  before  the  Prince, 
213;  the  act  passed,  ih.\  the 
Regency  Act  of  1830,  221 ;  the 
Regency  Acts  of  Her  Majesty,  223 

Regent,  the  office  of,  the  legal  de- 
finition of,  i.  183  andw.  See  also 
Wales,  Prince  of 

Registration  of  births,  marriages, 
and  deaths,  Act  for,  iii.  192 

Religious  liberty,  from  the  Refor- 
mation to  George  III.,  iii.  60- 
82  ;  commencement  of  relaxation 
of  the  penal  code,  88 ;  Corpora- 
tion and  Test  Acts  repealed,  157 ; 
Catholic  emancipation  carried, 
168;  admission  of  Quakers  to 
the  Commons  by  affirmation, 
177;  Jewish  disabilities,  186; 
registration  of  births,  marriages, 
and  deaths,  192;  the  Dissenters' 
Marriage  Bill,  ih. ;  admission  of 
dissenters  to  the  universities, 
195;  dissenters'  chapels,  199; 
church  rates,  201.  See  also 
Church  of  England ;  Church  in 

f  Ireland;  CHurch  of  Scotland; 
Dissenters ;  Jews  ;  Quakers  ; 
Roman  Catholics 


490 


Index. 


Eeporters.  8ce  Debates  in  Par- 
]j  anient 

Representation  in  Parliament,  de- 
fects in,  i.  328.  See  also  Reform 
in  Parliament 

Revenues  of  the  crown,  its  ancient 
possessions,  i.  225 ;  forfeitures, 
226  ;  grants  and  alienations,  ib. ; 
increase  of  revenues  by  Henry 
VII.  and  VIII.,  227;  destruc- 
tion of  the  revenues  under  the 
Commonwealth,  228 ;  recovery 
and  subsequent  waste,  ib. ;  re- 
straints on  alienation  of  crown 
property,  229 ;  constitutional  re- 
sult of  the  improvidence  of  kings, 
230  ;  settlement  of  crown  reve- 
nues by  parliament,  231  ;  the 
revenues  prior  to  the  Revolution, 
■ib, ;  the  civil  list  from  William 
III.  to  G-eorge  III.,  232 ;  settle- 
ment of  the  civil  list  at  the  ac- 
cession of  Greorge  III.,  234 ; 
charges  thereon,  236 ;  the  sur- 
plus of  hereditary  revenues,  243 ; 
regulation  of  civil  list,  244 ; 
other  crown  revenues,  235,  245 ; 
the  loss  of  the  Hanover  revenues, 
247 ;  the  Duchies  of  Lancaster 
and  Cornwall,  248 ;  private  pro- 
perty of  the  crown,  249  ;  pro- 
vision for  the  royal  family,  ib. ; 
mismanagement  of  the  land  reve- 
nues, 253  ;  proposal  for  sale  of 
crown  lands,  254 ;  appropriation 
of  the  proceeds,  255;  pensions 
charged  on  lands  and  revenues, 
256 

Revenuecommissioners,  disqualified 
fromsitting  in  parliament,  i.  370  ; 
— Officers'  Disfranchisement  Bill 
carried  by  the  Rockingham 
ministry,  61,  348 

Revenue    laws,    restraints   of,  on 

personal    liberty,    iii.    25; 

offices  thrown  open  to  dissenters 
and  Catholics,  111,  157,  168 

Revolution,  the,  parliamentary 
government  established  at,  i.  1 ; 
position  of  the  crown  since  the 


Revolution,  2  ;  revenues  of  the 
crown  prior  to,  231  ;  the  system 
of  appropriation  of  grants  to  the 
crown  commenced  at,  ii.  99 ;  and 
of  permanent  taxation,  106;  effect 
of  on  the  press,  243  ;  the  church 
policy  after,  iii.  77 

Revolutions  in  France,  the  effect  of, 
on  reform  in  England,  i.  402, 
405 

Revolution  Society,  the,  ii.  281 

Rialton,  Lady,  case  of,  cited  on 
the  'Bedchamber  Question,'  i. 
157 

Richard  II.,  the  revenues  of  his 
crown,  i.  226 

Richmond,  Duke  of,  his  motion 
respecting  the  regency,  i.  172; 
for  reduction  of  civil  list,  239  ; 
statement  as  to  the  nominee 
members,  361 ;  advocated  par- 
liamentary reform,  394;  his  mo- 
tion on  the  Middlesex  election 
proceedings,  ii.  23 

Roache,  Mr.,  opposed  Mr.  Wilkes 
for  Middlesex,  ii.  14 

Rockingham,  Marquess,  dismissed 
from  his  lord-lieutenancy  for  op- 
posing the  crown,  i.  23  ;  made 
premier,  33 ;  his  ministerial 
conditions,  34  ;  influence  of  the 
crown  in  parliament  exerted  in 
opposition  to  him,  36,  39  ;  dis- 
missed from  office,  40 ;  his 
second  administration,  60;  car- 
ried the  contractors,  the  civil  list, 
and  the  revenue  officers  bills,  61, 
241,  258,  348,  373,  389;  and 
the  reversal  of  the  Middlesex 
election  proceedings,  ii.  26  ;  de- 
nounced parliamentary  corrup- 
tion by  loans,  i.  385;  his  motion 
condemning  the  resolution  against 
Wilkes,  ii.  19;  moved  to  delay 
the  third  reading  of  a  land-tax 
bill,  ii.  102  ;  AVhigs  restored  to 
power  under,  151,  229;  his 
death,  151 ;  his  administration 
consent  to  the  independence  of 
Ireland,  iii.  315 


Index. 


491 


Rolls,  Master  of  the,  sole  judge 
not  disqualified  from  parliament, 
i.  375 

Roman  Catholics,  the  first  Relief 
Act,  1778,  ii.  272,  iii.  96;  the 
riots  in  Scotland  and  London, 
97,  98;  the  Scotch  Catholics 
withdraw  their  claims  for  relief, 
ii.  272,  iii.  98  ;  the  penal  code  of 
Elizabeth,  iii.  63  ;  Catholics  un- 
der James  I.,  Chas.  I.,  and 
Cromwell,  71-74 ;  the  passing 
of  the  Test  Act,  77  ;  repressive 
measures,  Wilham  Ill.-Geo. 
I.,  79-81 ;  the  Catholics  at  ac- 
cession of  Geo.  III.,  82,  89,  94 ; 
their  numbers,  83,  %.;  later  in- 
stances of  the  enforcement  of  the 
penal  laws,  96  ;  bill  to  restrain 
education  of  Protestants  by  Ca- 
tholics, 99 ;  the  case  of  the 
Protestant  Catholic  Dissenters, 
106 ;  another  measure  of  relief 
to  English  Catholics,  1791,  106; 
first  measures  of  relief  to  Catho- 
lics in  Ireland  and  Scotland, 
110,  111,  322;  the  Catholics 
and  the  militia,  114;  effect  of 
union  with  Ireland  on  Catholic 
relief,  ii.  174,  iii.  115;  Catholic 
claims,  1801-1810,  118-132; 
the  Army  and  Navy  Service 
Bill,  126;  the  Regency  not  fa- 
vourable to  Catholic  claims,  133 ; 
freedom  of  worship  to  Catholic 
soldiers,  134;  the  Catholic  Ques- 
tion, 1811-1823,  136-150; 
treated  as  an  open  question,  140, 
149  ;  Acts  for  relief  of  Naval 
and  Military  Ofiicers,  143 ;  the 
Catholic  Peers  Bill,  147;  the 
Catholic  Question  in  1823,  149  ; 
efforts  for  relief  of  English  Ca- 
tholics, 151  ;  the  laws  affecting 
Catholic  marriages,  152,  153; 
Office  of  Earl  Marshal  Bill,  154; 
Sir  F.  Burdett's  motion,  155; 
State  provision  for  Catholic 
clergy  carried  in  the  Commons, 
156  ;  the  Duke  of  Wellington's 


ministry,  ii.  191,  iii.  156  ;  repeal 
of  the  Corporation  and  Test  Acts, 
157;  Catholic  relief  in  1828, 162  ; 
the  Act,  ii.  192-195,  iii.  168, 
335;  the  Catholic  peers  take 
their  seats,  174;  Catholic  eman- 
cipation too  long  deferred,  175; 
number  of  Catholic  members  in 
House  of  Commons,  176 ;  Bills 
for  relief  in  respect  of  Catholic 
births,  marriages,  and  deaths, 
188-193  ;  fiual  repeal  of  penal- 
ties against  Roman  Catholics, 
200 ;  numbers,  &c.  of,  in  Eng- 
land, 222,  223;  in  Ireland, 
268  ;  the  papal  aggression,  227 ; 
the  Maynooth  and  Queen's  Col- 
leges, 270 ;  exclusion  of  Irish 
Catholics  from  the  Corpora- 
tions, 293 ;  from  the  Parlia- 
ment, 299,  303 ;  number  on 
Irish  bench,  336.  See  also 
Corporations 

Roman  Catholic  Officers  Relief 
Bill,  the,  iii.  143 

Romilly,  Sir  S.,  his  opinion  on  the 
pledge  required  from  the  G-ren- 
ville  ministry,  i.  110;  his  jus- 
tification of  the  purchase  of  seats, 
344;  his  efforts  to  reform  the 
penal  code,  iii.  396 

Ross,  General,  his  complaint  to  the 
house,  of  court  intimidation,  i. 
75 

Rothschild,  Baron  L.  N.   de,  the 

admission    of,    to    Parliament, 

i      ii.    84 ;    returned    for    Londou, 

!      iii.   182 ;   claims  to  be   sworn, 

183 
!  Rous,   Sir  J.,    his  hostile  motion 
against  Lord  North's  ministry, 

Royal  family,  the  provision  for,  i. 
249-253  ;  power  of  the  crown 
over,  262 ;  exempted  from 
Lord  Hardwicke's  Marriage  Act, 
263 

Royal  household,  the,  a  question 
between  the  Whig  leaders  and 
the  Regent,  i.   126;  the  'bed- 


492 


Index. 


chamber  question,'  155 ;  profu- 
sion in  George  III.'s,  236 ;  pro- 
posed reduction  in  William  IV.'s 
household,  246 

Eoyal  Marriage  Act  (1772),  i.  45, 
264 ;  arbitrary  principles  of  this 
act,  267 

Eoyal  Sign-Manual  Bill,  the,  to 
authorise  George  IV.  to  sign 
documents  by  a  stamp,  i.  216 

Kussell,  Lord  John  (now  Earl  Kus- 
sell),  his  first  motions  for  re- 
form, i.  408-416  ;  his  disfran- 
chisement bills,  414  ;  advocated 
the  enfranchisement  of  Leeds, 
Birmingham,  and  Manchester, 
415  ;  moved  the  first  reform  bill, 
422 ;  his  later  reform  measures, 
450,  452,  456  ;  attempts  to  form 
a  free- trade  ministry,  ii.  212 ; 
in  office,  216  ;  retires  from  Lord 
Palmerston's  ministry,  219 ; 
carries  the  repeal  of  Corporation 
and  Test  Acts,  iii.  157 ;  his 
efforts  to  obtain  the  admission  of 
Jews  to  Parliament,  186 ;  his 
Dissenters'  Marriage  Bills,  190, 
192  ;  his  Registration  Act,  192  ; 
his  letter  on  the  papal  aggres- 
sion, 230 ;  overthrows  the  Peel 
ministry  upon  the  Appropriation 
Question,  267 ;  carries  Municipal 
Eeform,  283 ;  and  amendments 
of  the  criminal  code,  398  ;  suc- 
ceeds Lord  Palmerston  as  pre- 
mier, 1865,  429  ;  revives  the 
question  of  reform,  430 ;  his 
Eeform  Bill,  1866,  431  ;  its  dis- 
astrous issue,  432  ;  his  resigna- 
tion, 433 

ST.    ALBANS    disfranchised,   i. 
433 
St.  Asaph,  Dean  of,  the  case  of,  ii.258 
Salomons,  Mr.,  the  admission  of,  to 
parliament,  ii.  84  ;  returned  for 
Greenwich,  iii.  184 ;  claims  to  be 
sworn,  ih. 
Salters  (Scotland).     8ee  Colliers 
Sandwich,    Earl     of,     denounced 


Wilkes  for  the  *  Essay  on  Wo- 
man,' ii.  6 ; '  Jemmy  Twitcher,'  7  n. 
Savile,  Sir  G,,  condemned  the  re- 
solution against  Wilkes,  ii.  17  ; 
his  bills  to  secure  the  rights  of 
electors,  24 ;  among  the  first  to 
advocate  Catholic  relief,  iii.  96  ; 
his    bill  to   restrain    Catholics 
from  teaching  Protestants,  99 
Sawbridge,   Mr.,   his    motions  for 
reform,  i.  399 ;    for   shortening 
duration  of  parliament,  441 
Say  and  Sele,  Lord,  his  apology  to 
Mr.    Grenville   for    refusing    a 
bribe,  i.  380 
Schism  Act,  the,  iii.  82 
Scot  and  lot,  a  franchise,  i.  331 
Scotland,    the    hereditary    crown 
revenues  of,  i.  245  ;  the  pensions 
charged  thereon,  257,  260 ;  the 
consolidation  of  Scotch  and  Eng- 
glish civil  lists,  261; the  peer- 
age of,  274 ;  the  representative 
peers  of,  ih. ;  Scottish  peers  created 
peers  of  Great  Britain,  286 ;  their 
rights,  ih. ;  the  probable  absorp- 
tion of  the  Scottish  peerage  into 
that  of  the  United  Kingdom,  289 ; 

Scottish  judges  disqualified, 

3  7  5 ; the  defective  representa- 
tion of  Scotland  prior  to  reform, 
355 ;  the  Eeform  Act  of,  429 ;  the 
Tory  party  in,  ii.  171,  180  ;  lite- 
rary influence  of  the  Scotch 
Whigs,  181 ;  alarm  of  democracy 
in,  292  ;  trials  for  sedition  and 
high  treason,  293,  304,  351  ;  the 
slavery  of  colliers  and  salters 
abolished,  iii.  39 ;  the  reforma- 
mation  in,  68 ;  intimidation  of 
parliament  by  the  mob,  ii.  271, 
iii.  97  ;  motion  for  repeal  of  the 
Test  Act  (Scotland),  107  ;  rehef 
to  Scotch  Episcopalians,  ]  08 ;  to 
Scotch  Catholics,  111;  religious 
disunion  in,  254  ;  statistic^  of 
places  of  worship  in,  ih.,  n. ; 
municipal  reform  in,  287 ;  new 
poor  laws  introduced  into,  408 ; 
Eeform  Act,  1868,  iii.  440 


I 


Index, 


49. 


Scott,  Sir  John,  the  ministerial 
adviser  during  the  regency  pro- 
ceedings, i.  192 

Secret  service  money,  issue  of,  re- 
strained, i.  242  ;  a  statement  of 
the  amount  of,  379 

Secretary  of  State,  the  powers 
given  to,  in  repression  of  libel, 
ii.  249,  347,  iii.  2,  8 ;  of  opening 

letters,  44  ; for  the  Colonies, 

date  of  formation  of  office,  360 

Sedition  and  seditious  libels,  trials 
for,  Wilkes  and  his  publishers, 
ii.  248;  the  publishers  of  Junius's 
Letters,  262;  the  Dean  of  St. 
Asaph,  268  ;  of  Stockdale,  259  ; 
Paine,  280;  Frost,  Winterbot- 
ham,  Briellat,  and  Hudson, 
289 ;  Muir  and  Palmer,  292, 
296 ;  Skirving,  Margarot,  and 
Gerrald,  297 ;  Eaton,  301  ; 
Yorke,  313;  Mr.  Eeeves,  326; 
Gilbert  Wakefield  and  the 
'  Courier,'  331  ;  of  Cobbett,  334, 
379  ;  J,  and  L.  Hunt  and  Drak- 
ard,  336  ;  Hunt  and  Wolseley, 
363  ;  O'Connell  and  others,  394, 
397 ;  measures  for  repression 
of  sedition  in  1792,  285;  1794, 
302;  1795,  317;  1799,  329; 
1817,  342;  1819,  358;  societies 
for  the  repression  of,  290,  367. 
&ee  also  Treason,  High,  Trials 
for 

Seditious  Meetings  Bills,  the,  ii. 
319,  361  ;  Libels  Bill,  361 

Selkirk,  Earl  of,  supports  the 
King  on  the  Catholic  question, 
i.  114 

Septennial  Act,  efforts  to  repeal,  i. 
441;  arguments  against,  443; 
in  favour,  444 

Session,  Court  of  (Scotland),  pro- 
ceedings of,  in  the  patronage 
cases,  iii.  242-247 

Shaftesbury,  bribery  at,  i.  340 

Sheil,  Mr.,  the  character  of  his 
oratory,  ii.  122 

Shelburne,  Earl  of,  dismissed  from 
command  for  opposition  to  the 


crown,  i.  28  ;  his  motion  on  the 
public  expenditure,  63  ;  on  the 
intimidation  of  peers,  54  ;  his 
administration,  62 ;  supported 
by  the  royal  influence,  iA.;  in 
office,  ii.  151,  229 ;  his  conces- 
sions to  America,  154 

Slieridan,  Mr.,  the  character  of  his 
oratory,  ii.  115 ;  one  of  the  Whig 
associates  of  the  Prince  of 
Wales,  161 ;  adhered  to  Fox, 
167  ;  his  motion  on  the  state  of 
the  nation,  1793,  288;  brought 
Palmer's  case  before  the  Com- 
mons, 299  ;  urged  repeal  of  the 
Habeas  Corpus  Suspension  Act, 
311,  312;  his  opposition  to  the 
Seditious  Meetings  Bill,  322 

Shrewsbury,  Duke  of,  his  precedent 
cited  as  to  the  temporary  con- 
centration of  offices  in  the  Duke 
of  Wellington,  i.  148 

Sidmouth,  Viscount,  withdrew 
from  Pitt's  administration,  i. 
101  ;  took  office  under  Lord 
G-renville,  103 ;  joined  Greorge 
in.  in  opposing  the  Army  Ser- 
vice Bill,  105 ;  resigned  office, 
106 ;  supported  the  King,  ii.,  1 14 ; 
as  premier,  ii.  175 ;  in  office 
with  the  Whigs,  177  ;  his  re- 
pressive policy,  340,  iii,  19 : 
his  circular  to  the  lord-lieuten- 
ants, ii.  345 ;  his  employment 
of  spies,  iii.  41 ;  his  Dissenting 
Ministers  Bill,  134.  S,cg  also 
Addington,  Mr. 

Silk-weavers,  riots  by,  ii.  266  ;  bill 
passed  for  protection  of  their 
trade,  267 

Sinecures,  official  and  legal,  abo- 
lished, iii.  386,  389 

Six  Acts,  the,  passed,  ii.  358 

Skirving,  W.,  trial  of,  for  sedition, 
ii.  297 

Slavery,  in  England,  ii.  35 ;  in 
Scotland,  37  ;  in  the  Colonies,  39 

Slave  Trade,  the  abolition  of,  ad- 
vocated by  petitions  to  parlia- 
ment, ii.  64 


494 


Index. 


Slave-trade  Association,  the,  ii. 
277.  iii.  39 

Smith,  Mr,  W.,  his  anecdote  as  to 
bribery  of  members  by  Lord 
North,  i.  382,  n. ;  his  Unitarian 
]VIarriap:es  Bills,  iii.  151,  154 

Smith  O'Brien,  abortive  insurrec- 
tion by,  ii.  400 

Sommersett's  (the  negro)  case,  iii. 
36 

Spa  Fields,  meeting  at,  ii.  345 

Speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons, 
the,  election  of,  during  George 
III.'s  incapacity,  i.  183  ;  alterca- 
tions of  members  with,  ii.  127  ; 
the  increased  authority  of  the 
chair,  128 

Spencer,  Earl,  election  expenses  of, 
i.  337 

Spies,  employment  of,  by  govern- 
ment, iii.  39 ;  under  Lord  Sid- 
mouth,  41;  their  employment 
considered,  42 ;  the  Cato  Street 
conspiracy  discovered  by,  43 

Spring  Rice,  Mr.,  his  scheme  for 
settling  church  rates,  iii.  204  ;  his 
speech  on  the  state  of  Ireland, 
334,  n, 

Stafford,  Marquess  of,  his  motion 
on  the  pledge  exacted  from  the 
Grenville  ministry,  i.  112,  113 

Stamp  Act,  the  American,  the  in- 
fluence of  the  crown  exerted 
against  its  repeal,  i.  36 ;  iii. 
346,  347 

Stamp  duty.     Bee  Newspapers 

State  trials.  See  Treason,  High, 
Trials  for 

Steele,  Sir  E.,  opposed  the  Peerage 
Bill,  i.  276 

Stockdale,  Mr.,  his  actions  against 
Messrs.  Hansard  for  libel,  ii. 
78  ;  committed  for  contempt,  80 ; 
the  case  of,  ii.  259 

Strangers,  the  exclusion  of,  from 
debates  in  parliament,  ii.  27,  29  ; 
the  attendance  of  ladies,  29 ; 
their  exclusion,  52,  «.;  their 
presence  permitted,  55 

Strathbogie  cases,  the,  ii.   245 


Subject,  liberty  of,  the  earliest  of 
political  privileges,  iii.  1 ;  gene- 
ral warrants,  2  ;  suspension  of 
the  Habeas  Corpus  Act,  10,  19, 
n. ;  impressment,  20 ;  the  re- 
straints caused  by  the  revenue 
laws,  25  ;  imprisonment  for  debt, 
ih.,  31 ;  for  contempt  of  court, 
26 ;  arrest  on  mesne  process, 
29  ;  debtors'  prisons,  32  ;  insol- 
vent debtors,  34 ;  negroes  in 
Great  Britain,  35 ;  colliers  and 
salters  in  Scotland,  38;  spies 
and  informers,  39 ;  opening 
letters,  44 ;  protection  of  aliens, 
49  ;  extradition  treaties,  59 

Sudbury,  the  seat  for,  a,dvertised 
for  sale,  i.  337 ;  disfranchised, 
433 

Sunderland,  Lady,  case  of,  cited 
on  the  '  Bedchamber  Question,' 
i.  157 

Supplies  to  the  crown  delayed,  i. 
80,  103,  5^.,  423;  refused,  101  ; 
granted,  99 

Supremacy,  oath  of,  imposed  by 
Queen  Elizabeth,  iii.  63  ;  on  the 
House  of  Commons,  ih. ;  Catho- 
lic peers  exempted  from,  107, 
147 ;  altered  by  the  Catholic 
Eelief  Act,  167,  168 

Surrey,  Earl  of,  his  motion  on  the 
dismissal  of  the '  coalition'  minis- 
try, i.  76 

Sussex,  Duke  of,  voted  against  a 
Regency  Bill,  i.  211;  his  mar- 
riages, 270 


TAXATION"  and  expenditure,  the 
control  of  the  Commons  over, 
i.  230,  ii.  98,  104;  temporary 
and  permanent  taxation,  ii.  106 
Temple,  Earl,  proscribed  by  the 
King  for  intimacy  with  Wilkes, 
i.  28 ;  his  agent  in  the  exertion 
of  the  crown  influence  against 
the  India  Bill,  68  ;  employed  to 
dismiss  the  'coalition,'  71;  ac- 
cepted and  resigned  office,  72 


Index. 


495 


Tennyson,  Mr.,  his  motions  to 
shorten  the  duration  of  parlia- 
ment, i.  442 

Thatched  House  Society,  the,  iii. 
33 

Thelwall,  J.,  tried  for  high  treason, 
ii.  306 

Thistlewood,  A.,  tried  for  high 
treason,  ii.  345 ;  for  the  Cato 
Street  plot,  362 

Thompson,  proceeded  against,  for 
publishing  debates,  ii.  39 ; 
brought  before  Alderman  OUver, 
42 

Thurles,  Synod  of,  opposition 
of,  to  the  Queen's  Colleges,  iii. 
274 

Thurlow,  Lord,  the  character  of, 
ii.  160,  iii.  392  ;  his  negotiations 
for  George  III.  with  the  Whigs, 
i.  50  ;  his  advice  to  the  King  on 
his  proposed  retreat  to  Hanover, 
64;  co-operated  in  his  opposi- 
tion to  the  India  Bill,  68;  is 
made  Lord  Chancellor,  72 ;  sup- 
ported the  resolutions  for  a  Ke- 
gency,  182;  affixed  the  great 
seal  to  commissions  under  the 
authority  of  parliament,  188 ; 
announced  the  King's  recovery, 
189  ;  resisted  the  Cricklade  Dis- 
franchisement Act,  340 

Tierney,  Mr.,  joins  the  Whigs,  ii. 

167  ;  their  leader,  174,  186 
Tiudal,  Chief  Justice,  his  opinion 
respecting    the  law    of    church 
rates,  iii.  205 
Tithes,   the  commutation   of,    iii. 
218  ;  in  Ireland,  256,  269  ;  asso- 
ciated with  the  question  of  ap- 
propriation, 264 
Toleration  Act,  the,  iii.  78;    dis- 
senters relieved  from  its  require- 
ments, 94,  135 
Tooke,  Home,  trial    of,   for  high 

treason,  ii.  305 
Tory  party,  the,  supplied  the  greater 
number  of  the  '  King's  friends,' 
i,  13  ;  the  ascendency  of,  xmder 
George  IV.,  129 ;  the  period  of 


their  ascendency  in  the  House 
of  Lords,  305.  Sec  also  Party 
Townshend,  Mr.,  his  manoeuvre  to 
secure  a  share  in  a  loan,  i.  3^4  ; 
his  proposed  land  tax  reduced 
by  the  Commons,  ii.  101  ;  his 
scheme  for  colonial  taxation,  iii. 
350 

Trades'  unions,  ii.  404 ;  procession 
of,  through  London,  405  ;  recep- 
tion of  their  petition  by  Lord 
Melbourne,  406 

Traitorous  Correspondence  Act, 
passing  of,  iii.  52 

Transportation,  commencement  of 
the  punishment,  iii.  368 ;  esta- 
blishment of  the  Australian 
penal  settlements,  ib.;  discon- 
tinued, 359,  400 

Transubstantiation,  Lord  Grey's 
motion  for  relief  from  declara- 
tion against,  iii.  144 

Treasonable  Practices  Bill,  the 
passing  of  the,  ii.  317 

Treason,  High,  trials  for,  of 
Walker,  ii.  301 ;  of  Watt  and 
Downie,  304;  of  Hardy  and 
others,  307  ;  of  Watson,  Thistle- 
wood,  and  others,  345 

Treasury  warrants,  the  form  of, 
for  issue  of  public  money  during 
George  III.'s  incapacity,  i.  214 

Tutchin,  beaten  to  death  for  a 
libel,  ii.  244 


UNDERWOOD,  Lady  C,  mar- 
ried the  Duke  of  Sussex,  i. 
270 

Uniformity,  Act  of,  of  Queen 
Elizabeth,  iii.  63;  of  Charles 
IL,  75 

Union,  the,  of  England  and  Ire- 
land, agitation  for  repeal  of, 
ii.  393;  effect  of,  on  Catholic 
relief,  iii.  115;  the  means  by 
which  it  was  accomplished,  330 

Unions,  political,  established,  ii. 
383  ;  their  proceedings,  385 ; 
organise  delegates,  388  ;  procla- 


496 


Index, 


mation  against,  389 ;  threaten- 
ing attitude  of,  390 

Unitarians,  the,  toleration  with- 
held from,  iii.  78  ;  further  pe- 
nalties against,  79 ;  first  motion 
for  relief  of,  109  ;  relief  granted, 
136;  laws  affecting  their  mar- 
riages, 151-153 

United  Englishmen,  Irishmen,  and 
Scotsmen,  the  proceedings  of,  ii. 
328,  iii.  322,  323;  suppressed 
by  Act,  ii.  329 

United  Presbyterian  Church,  the, 
iii.  236,  n.,  239 

Universal  suffrage,  motions  for,  i. 
395,  407,  416;  agitation  for,  ii. 
283,  316,  351,  408;  in  the  colo- 
nies, iii.  371 

Universities,  the,  of  Oxford  and 
Cambridge,  admission  of  dissen- 
ters to,  iii.  92  ;  settlement  of  the 

question  in  1871,449;  of 

London,  198 


VAN  DIEMEN'S  LAND,  a 
legisMure  granted  to,  iii. 
359,  371  ;  transportation  to,  dis- 
continued, 359 

Vestries,  the  common  law  relating 
to,  iii.  276 ;  Mr.  S.  Bourne's 
and  Sir  J.  Hobhouse's  Vestry 
Acts,  277 

Veto  Act,  the  (Church  of  Scotland) 
iii.  240 ;  rescinded,  252 

Victoria,  Queen,  her  Majesty,  her 
accession,  i.  154  ;  the  ministry 
then  in  office,  ih. ;  her  house- 
hold, ih. ;  the  '  bedchamber  ques- 
tion,' 155,  159 ;  her  memoran- 
dum concerning  acts  of  govern- 
ment, 160;  judicious  exercise  of 
her  authority,  163  ;  the  Eegency 
Acts  of  her  reign,  223 ;  her  civil 
list,  246  ;  her  pension  list,  261 

Volunteers,  the  (Ireland),  iii.  311 ; 
demand  independence  of  Ireland, 
312,  314;  and  Parliamentary 
Keform,  318 


WAKEFIELD,  bribery  at 
(1860),  i.  437 

Wakefield,  Mr.  G.,  tried  for  libel, 
ii.  331 

Waldegrave,  Dowager  Countess  of, 
married  to  the  Duke  of  Glouces- 
ter, i.  262 

Waldegrave,  Earl  of,  his  opinion 
on  the  education  of  George  III., 
i.  10 

Wales,  Prince  of  (George  IV.),  his 
character,  i.  119 ;  subject  to 
court  influence,  120;  indifferent 
to  politics,  ih.',  his  separation 
from  the  Whigs,  123,  127; 
raised  and  disappointed  their 
hopes,  121;  proposals  for  their 
union  with  the  Tories,  123,  125 ; 
the  'household  question'  be- 
tween him  and  the  Whigs,  126  ; 
debates  as  to  his  rights  as 
Kegent  (1788),  178-181;  dis- 
claimed his  right,  179  ;  his  re- 
ply to  the  Eegency  scheme,  184; 
accepted  the  resolutions,  185  ; 
his  name  omitted  from  the  com- 
mission to  open  parliament, 
188  ;  the  address  from  the  Irish 
parliament,  194;  accepted  reso- 
lutions for  Regency  Bill  (1810), 
213;  his  civil  list,  244;  his 
debts,  250 ;  his  marriage  with 
Mrs.  Fitzherbert,  269 ;  the 
guardianship  over  Princess 
Charlotte,  271  ;  a  member  of 
the  Whig  party,  ii.  161 ;  deserts 
them,  167,  182;  alleged  effect 
of  ]Mr.  Pox's  death  upon  his 
conduct,  178 ;  attack  on,  when 
Eegent,  342 ;  unfavourable  to 
Catholic  claims,  iii.  133 

Wales,  Princess  Dowager  of,  her 
influence  over  George  III.,  i.  10; 
advocated  the  exercise  of  his 
personal  authority,  24;  the  in- 
sertion of  her  name  into  the 
Eegency  Bill,  174 

Wales,  the  Princes  of,  the  Duchy 
of  Cornwall  their  inneritanco,  i. 
248 


Index, 


497 


Wales,  progress  of  dissent  in,  iii. 
213 

"Walker,  T.,  tried  for  high  treason, 
ii.  301 

Walpole,  Horace,  cited  in  proof  of 
parliamentary  corruption,  i.  335, 
w.,  378,  383 ;  appointment  of- 
fered to  his  nephew,  369 

Walpole,  Mr.,  seceded  from  Lord 
Derby's  ministry  on  question  of 
reform,  i.  455 

Walpole,  Sir  E.,  opposed  the  Peer- 
age Bill,  i.  276 ;  displaced  from 
office  by  vote  on  an  election  peti- 
tion, 364  ;  bribery  of  members 
a  system  under,  377  ;  the  charges 
of  bribery  not  proved,  ii. ;  his 
remark  on  misrepresentations  by 
reporters,  ii.  38 ;  his  indifference 
to  newspaper  attacks,  ii.  246  ; 
•mthdrew  the  Excise  Bill,  266; 
his  refusal  to  levy  taxes  on  our 
colonies,  iii.  343 

Warburton,  Bishop,  his  name 
affixed  to  notes  on  the  'Essay 
on  Woman,'  ii.  6 

Ward,  Mr.,  advocated  vote  by  ballot, 
i.  447 

Warrants.     See  General  Warrants 

Watson,  J.,  tried  for  high  treason, 
ii.  345 

Watt,  K.,  tried  for  high  treason,  ii. 
304 

Wellesley,  Marquess,  commissioned 
to  form  a  ministry,  i.  125;  his 
ministry  and  the  Catholic  claims, 
iii.  139  ;  his  motion,  ih. 

Wellington,  Duke  of,  obtained  the 
consent  of  George  IV.  to  Catho- 
lic emancipation,  i.  137 ;  anti- 
reform  character  of  his  ministry, 
415  ;  his  anti-reform  declaration, 
418 ;  failed  to  form  an  anti-re- 
form ministry,  143,  312;  formed 
a  ministry  with  Peel,  146;  his 
assumption  of  different  cabinet 
offices  during  Peel's  absence,  148 ; 
his  opinion  on  the  proposed  crea- 
tion of  new  peers,  313  ;  his  posi- 
tion as  an  orator,  ii.  121 ;  seceded 


from  Canning  on  the   Catholic 
question,     189;    in   office,   191, 
196;  secession  of  Liberal  mem- 
bers   from    bis     cabinet,    192 ; 
beaten  on  repeal  of  the  Test,  &c. 
Acts,  192,  iii.  157  ;  his  ministry 
and  Catholic  claims,  ii.  192,  iii. 
156,    164;  prosecutes  the  Tory 
press,  ii.  378 
Wensleydale,  Baron,  the  life-peer- 
age case  (1856),  i.  295 
Wesley,  the  Eev.  J.,  effect  of  his 
labours,  iii.  85 ;  number,  &c.  of 
Wesleyans,  222,  223 
Westminster  election  (1784),  Fox's 
vexatious  contest  at,  i.  361 ;  the 
scrutiny,   and  his  return  with- 
held, i6. ;   act  passed  in  conse- 
quence, 353 
Westminster  Hall,  public  meetings 
prohibited  within  one  mile  of,  ii. 
344 
West  India  duties,  the,  vested  in 
the  crown  till  the   accession   of 
William  IV.,  i.  245 
Westmoreland  county,  expense  of  a 

contested  election  for,  i.  354 
Weymouth,  Lord,  overtures  to,  from 
George  III.,  i.  49;  libelled  by 
Wilkes,  ii.  9 ;  proposal  that  the 
Whigs  should  take  office  under 
him,  ii.  150 
Whamcliffe,     Lord,    his     motion 
against  the  dissolution  (1831), 
i.  141,  ii.  88 
Wheble,  proceeded  against  for  pub- 
lishing    debates,    ii.    39;     dis- 
charged from  custody  by  WiJkp8 
41 
Whig   Club,   the,   meeting   of,  to 
oppose  the  Treason  and  Sedition 
Bills,  ii.  323 
Whig  party,  the,  period  of  ascen- 
dency of,   i.   8;    regarded  with 
jealousy  by  George  III.,  11 ;  pro- 
scription of,  under  Lord   Bute, 
23  ;  separation  between  them  and 
Prince  Eegent,  120,  123;  decline 
office   on  the    'household  ques- 
tion,' 126;  unsuccessful  against 


YOL.  III. 


K  K 


498 


Index. 


"WIK 


the  ministry,  128  ;  espouse  the 
Queen's  cause,  133  ;  lose  the  con- 
fidence of  William  IV.,  145  ;  the 
period  of  their  ascendency  in  the 
House  of  Lords,  305 

Whitaker,  Mr.,  opposed  Wilkes  for 
Middlesex,  ii.  14 

Whitbread,  Mr.,  his  remarks  on  the 
Perceval  ministry,  i.  Ill ;  moved 
to  omit  Lord  Eldon's  name  from 
the  council  of  regency,  206  ;  his 
party  estranged  from  Earl  Grey's, 
ii.  182 

White  Conduit  House,  threatened 
meeting  at,  ii.  389 

Whittam,  a  messenger  of  the  house, 
committed  by  the  Lord  Mayor 
for  apprehending  a  printer,  ii.  42 ; 
his  recognisance  erased,  45; 
saved  from  prosecution,  ih. 

Wilberforce,  Mr.,  promoter  of  the 
abolition  of  slavery,  ii.  277 ; 
endeavours  to  obtain  admission 
of  Catholics  to  the  militia,  iii. 
114 

Wilkes,  Mr.,  advocated  parliamen- 
tary reform,  i,  394  ;  is  denied  his 
parliamentary  privilege,  ii.  3 ; 
proceeded  against  for  libel  in  the 
'  North  Briton,'  4 ;  absconded 
and  is  expelled,  5 ;  proceeded 
against  in  the  Lords.  6 ;  returned 
for  Middlesex,  8  ;  committed,  ii.; 
his  accusations  against  Lord 
Mansfield,  9  ;  the  question  he 
raised  at  the  bar  of  the  house, 
%h.;  expelled  for  libel  on  Lord 
Weymouth,  ih. ;  re-elected,  13  ; 
again  elected,  but  Luttrell  seated 
by  the  house,  14;  elected  alder- 
man, 15  ;  efforts  to  reverse  the 
proceedings  against  him,  16;  his 
complaint  against  the  deputy- 
clerk  of  the  crown,  24;  again 
returned  for  Middlesex,  and  takes 
his  seat,  25  ;  lord  mayor,  ti.  ; 
the  resolution  against  him  ex- 
punged, i.  61,  ii.  26;  instigated 
the  publication  of  debates,  37 ;  in- 
terposed to  protect  printers,  41 ;  is 


proceeded  against  by  the  Com- 
mons, 43 ;  advocated  pledges  to 
constituents  by  members,  70 ; 
attacks  Lord  Bute  and  Mr, 
G-renville  in  the  *  North  Briton,' 
247 ;  proceeded  against,  249, 
267,  iii.  3;  brings  actions  against 
Mr.  Wood  and  Lord  Halifax,  4, 
6  ;  dogged  by  spies,  40 

Williams,  Sir  Hugh,  passed  over  in 
a  brevet,  for  opposition  to  the 
court  policy,  i.  47 

William  III.,  his  personal  share  in 
the  government,  i.  6 ;  his  sign 
manual  affixed  by  a  stamp,  218  ; 
the  revenues  of  his  crown,  228  ; 
grants  to  his  followers,  ih. ;  his 
civil  list,  232  ;  tried  to  influence 
parliament  by  the  multiplication 
of  offices,  369;  the  bribery  of 
members  during  his  reign,  377  ; 
popular  addresses  to,  praying  a 
dissolution  of  parliament,  ii.  88 ; 
his  church  policy,  iii.  78-80 ; 
towards  the  church  of  Scotland, 
80  ;  towards  Catholics,  81 

William  IV.,  supported  parliamen- 
tary reform,  i.  138, 312,  424  ;  dis- 
solved parliament(l  83 1),1 1 4,424 ; 
created  sixteen  peers  in  favour  of 
reform,  309  ;  exerted  his  influ- 
ence over  the  peers,  143,  427 ; 
withdrew  his  confidence  from  the 
reform  ministry,  145;  suddenly 
dismissed  theMelbourne  ministry, 
146;  the  Wellington  and  Peel, 
ministry,  148 ;  the  Melbourne 
ministry  reinstated,  153  ;  regency 
questions  on  his  accession,  219; 
his  civil  list,  245;  opposed  the 
reduction  of  his  household,  246  ; 
surrendered  the  four  and  a  half 
per  cent,  duties,  260 ;  his  declara- 
tion against  the  Appropriation 
Question,  iii.  263 

Williams,  a  printer,  sentenced  to 
the  pillory,  ii.  251 

Windham,  Mr.,  his  position  as  an 
orator,  ii.  117 

Wines  and  Cider  Duties  Bill  (1 763)^ 


Index. 


499 


the  first  money  bill  divided  upon 
•     by  the  Lords,  ii.  107 

Winterbotham,  Mr.,  tried  for  sedi- 
tion, ii.  289 

Wolseley,Sir  C,  elected  popular  re- 
presentative of  Birmingham,  ii. 
362 ;  tried  for  sedition,  203 

Wood,  Mr.  Gr.,  his  Universities  Bill, 
iii.  196 

Woodfall,  his  trial  for  publishing 
Junius's  Letter,  ii.  253 ;  the 
judgment  laid  before  the  Lords, 
256 

Woods,  Forests,  and  Land  Bevenues 
Commission,  i.  255 ;  separated 
from  the  Public  Works,  256 

"  Woman,  Essay  on,"  Wilkes  pro- 
secuted for  publishing,  ii.  6 

Working  classes,  measures  for  the 
improvement  of  the,  iii.  411. 
See  also  Middle  Classes 

Wortley,  Mr.  S,,  his  motion  for  ad- 
dress to  Kegent  to  form  an  effi- 
cient ministry,  i.  125 


TOB 


Wray,  Sir  C,  opposed  Fox  at  the 
Westminster  election,  i.  351 

Writs  for  new  members,  doubt  re- 
specting issue  of,  during  King's 
illness,  i.  177 ;  writs  of  summons 
for  elections,  addressed  to  return- 
ing officers,  460 


YARMOUTH,  freemen  of,  dis- 
franchised, i.  434 

York,  Duke  of,  opposed  the  regency 
proceedings,  i.  186,  211  ;  his 
name  omitted  from  the  commis- 
sion to  open  parliament,  187,213; 
attached  to  Lady  Mary  Coke, 
264 

Yorke,  Mr.,  enforced  the  exclusion 
of  strangers  from  debates,  ii.  52 

Yorke,  H.  R.;  tried  for  sedition,  ii. 
313 

Yorkshire,  petition,  the,  for  parlia- 
mentary reform,  i.  398,  ii.  63 


THE   END. 


tOHDOH:    PBIWTBD   BT 

8P0TTISW00DB    AHD    CO.,     KEW-STREKT    SQCARa 

AJTD    PABtlAMIHT   8TBBW 


JN 
216 
.MS 
J  861 
V.3 


May,  Thomas  Erskine,  Sir,  Baron 
Farnborough,  1815-1886. 
The  constitutional  history  of 
England  since  the  accession  of 
George  the  third,  1760-1860  :